Skip to content
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

Is the "size_divisiblity" in vit should be "size_divisibility"? #4676

Open
yourlovedu opened this issue Nov 23, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

Is the "size_divisiblity" in vit should be "size_divisibility"? #4676

yourlovedu opened this issue Nov 23, 2022 · 1 comment
Labels
documentation Problems about existing documentation or comments

Comments

@yourlovedu
Copy link

I notice that in file "https://github.com/facebookresearch/detectron2/blob/main/detectron2/modeling/backbone/vit.py", in line 471:
"size_divisiblity": self._size_divisibility,
The key is "size_divisiblity".
But in file "https://github.com/facebookresearch/detectron2/blob/main/detectron2/structures/image_list.py", line 96:
if "size_divisibility" in padding_constraints:
The key is "size_divisibility", which means that the key in "vit.py" is missing one “i”,which leads to different padding foramt for images( one is square and the other is not).
I want to know that is this a bug? Or it's just right to pad the image to square in vitdet?

@github-actions github-actions bot added the needs-more-info More info is needed to complete the issue label Nov 23, 2022
@ppwwyyxx ppwwyyxx removed the needs-more-info More info is needed to complete the issue label Nov 26, 2022
@facebookresearch facebookresearch deleted a comment from github-actions bot Nov 26, 2022
@ppwwyyxx ppwwyyxx added the documentation Problems about existing documentation or comments label Dec 15, 2022
@matejsuchanek
Copy link

#4981 deals with this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Problems about existing documentation or comments
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants