-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Incorrect checkpoint results #18
Comments
It looks like you did not load the model weight well. Please check the output result txt first. And then check if the model weights are loaded well. |
Hello there, I also have the same problem these days. I use the default dsgn2.ymal config file and load your pre-trained models of DSGN2 Please explain a bit about how to load the model weights correctly. Thanks |
Hi, can you show me the inference results and the log? In my old environment the results should be correct. Note that there could be some warning during loading the weight (ignore it, you might refer #11) |
Yes, I attach the evaluation log info below: 2023-12-11 14:42:12,065 INFO Start logging 2023-12-11 15:01:34,400 INFO ---- 2d box evaluation ---- |
Thanks!
|
Thanks for the info~
Nothing inside the default/final_result/data/000001.txt (No bounding boxes)
addict 2.4.0
I am training the model on one 3090ti with batch_size == 1, it still needs two days. I will update the result here. |
|
Yes, for example: In 000004.txt: Car -1 -1 -7.4348 278.6960 178.8151 349.5790 215.2029 1.785065 1.764839 4.631009 -15.715478 2.122239 38.505917 -7.822333 0.21516302
I have tested the 34-epoch, the result likes below: 2023-12-13 10:45:00,225 INFO *************** Performance of EPOCH 34 ***************** To find out why, try turning on parallel diagnostics, see https://numba.pydata.org/numba-doc/latest/user/parallel.html#diagnostics for help. File "pcdet/datasets/kitti/kitti_object_eval_python/eval.py", line 160: warnings.warn(errors.NumbaPerformanceWarning(msg, To find out why, try turning on parallel diagnostics, see https://numba.pydata.org/numba-doc/latest/user/parallel.html#diagnostics for help. File "pcdet/datasets/kitti/kitti_object_eval_python/eval.py", line 160: warnings.warn(errors.NumbaPerformanceWarning(msg, 2023-12-13 10:45:27,732 INFO ---- 2d box evaluation ---- 2023-12-13 10:46:00,480 INFO Result is save to /workspace/Dataset/DSGN2/outputs/workspace_Dataset_DSGN2_configs_stereo_kitti_models/dsgn2.default/ckpt/checkpoint_epoch_34.pth.eval/eval/epoch_34/val/default The 3D evaluation looks good, but why the performance of the 2D bounding box prediction is 0? |
Cool, the result looks normal. The 2D bounding box results are referred to the box AP. For example, Car AP_R40@0.70, 0.70, 0.70: The 2D bbox AP_{0.7}_R40 (moderate) is 94.4, the BEV bbox AP_R40 is 76.3. |
hello. THANKS !! |
Sorry that my machines have no the KITTI dataset right now. The official model is trained and inferenced with this code. Since you run the model, you can try training the model on your own and check the results after several epochs. |
@chenyilun95 @Blume95 一样的问题...对官方的权重文件目前有解决的办法吗?或者有大佬可以提供一个训练过的文件吗?我只是想用测试一下结果,2080ti不太方便训练,谢谢! |
Hi authors,
Thank you for your amazing work. I have been trying to verify the checkpoint results but unfortunately I'm getting some unexpected results.
`Car AP@0.70, 0.70, 0.70:
bbox AP:27.2850, 22.1567, 15.7245
bev AP:19.3694, 14.8054, 14.6355
3d AP:10.7381, 9.0909, 9.0909
aos AP:23.12, 18.91, 14.14
Car AP_R40@0.70, 0.70, 0.70:
bbox AP:21.2188, 15.2842, 13.2074
bev AP:16.5121, 11.5316, 9.7222
3d AP:3.4522, 2.3132, 2.1522
aos AP:17.10, 12.06, 10.29
Car AP@0.70, 0.50, 0.50:
bbox AP:27.2850, 22.1567, 15.7245
bev AP:40.3225, 25.3175, 25.2042
3d AP:29.5763, 23.2644, 16.2642
aos AP:23.12, 18.91, 14.14
Car AP_R40@0.70, 0.50, 0.50:
bbox AP:21.2188, 15.2842, 13.2074
bev AP:34.8517, 24.6689, 18.0450
3d AP:26.6140, 18.2151, 14.1654
aos AP:17.10, 12.06, 10.29
Pedestrian AP@0.50, 0.50, 0.50:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
bev AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
3d AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
aos AP:0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Pedestrian AP_R40@0.50, 0.50, 0.50:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
bev AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
3d AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
aos AP:0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Pedestrian AP@0.50, 0.25, 0.25:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
bev AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
3d AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
aos AP:0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Pedestrian AP_R40@0.50, 0.25, 0.25:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
bev AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
3d AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
aos AP:0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Cyclist AP@0.50, 0.50, 0.50:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
bev AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
3d AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
aos AP:0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Cyclist AP_R40@0.50, 0.50, 0.50:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
bev AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
3d AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
aos AP:0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Cyclist AP@0.50, 0.25, 0.25:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
bev AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
3d AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
aos AP:0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Cyclist AP_R40@0.50, 0.25, 0.25:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
bev AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
3d AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
aos AP:0.00, 0.00, 0.00
2023-08-03 18:48:56,428 INFO ---- 2d box evaluation ----
2023-08-03 18:50:14,761 INFO Car AP_R40@0.70, 0.70, 0.70:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
Car AP_R40@0.70, 0.50, 0.50:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
Pedestrian AP_R40@0.50, 0.50, 0.50:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
Pedestrian AP_R40@0.50, 0.25, 0.25:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
Cyclist AP_R40@0.50, 0.50, 0.50:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000
Cyclist AP_R40@0.50, 0.25, 0.25:
bbox AP:0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000`
Any idea as to where I could be going wrong with the evaluation code?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: