-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.6k
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
[Feature] Add Cutout transform #1022
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1022 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 89.55% 89.62% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 119 119
Lines 6626 6673 +47
Branches 1034 1043 +9
==========================================
+ Hits 5934 5981 +47
Misses 488 488
Partials 204 204
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Hi @lkm2835 |
|
Hi, @lkm2835 Nice work indeed. Please resolve comments @Junjun2016 left above. We would review your pr quickly. |
I checked the comment. As soon as my personal work is over, I will resolve it. |
--> I added unittests. .
--> 'Some results' means some my experimental results? .
--> When I experiment in mmseg, I don't fill with ignoring label. |
Yes.
We can make a comparison of these two cases. |
In my experiment(trash segmentation), I got a 0.7236 mIoU in my valid set. upernet-swin-large was used. I got a 0.7316 mIoU with Cutout without ignoring label. In another experiment, result is 0.6970 --> 0.7177. Are you sure you asked for these experimental results? |
Could also provide the results with ignoring label. |
Besides, could provide configs and results (if available) on ade20k, cityscapes both with and without ignoring label. |
modified ignore_index with |
Great, thanks for your hard work. |
Sorry, I'm asking because I'm not good at English. |
We will do some ablation study with |
Please merge the master branch into your branch, thank you. |
If possible, Could you advise me how to use Codecov for test code in my terminal? (before PR) |
@MengzhangLI, please. |
coverage run --source={package, e.g., mmdet} --branch -m pytest
coverage report -m |
|
Thank you :) |
pytest tests # test all files in tests folder |
Hi, @lkm2835 Thank you so much for your warm-hearted work. In the future, if you have fixed the comment by reviewer, the comment would be shown as The pr would be more simple ;) Best, |
Hi @RockeyCoss |
Hi, @lkm2835 |
Thank you for providing the experimental results. |
@lkm2835 Hi, sorry for the late reply. During training, we evaluate the model and save the model for every certain number of training iterations. Best index means the index of the saved model that performs best. |
@RockeyCoss, Thanks for your replay. |
@RockeyCoss Could report more results here. |
Not needed yet since we have already run lots of ablation studies. |
Hi @lkm2835 |
* Fix typo in usage example * [Feature] Add CutOut transform * CutOut repr covered by unittests * Cutout ignore index, test * ignore_index -> seg_fill_in, defualt is None * seg_fill_in is added to repr * test is modified for seg_fill_in is None * seg_fill_in (int), 0-255 * add seg_fill_in test * doc string for seg_fill_in * rename CutOut to RandomCutOut, add prob * Add unittest when cutout is False
…lab#1022) Deprecate `init_git_repo` and `push_to_hub`, refactor `train_unconditional.py`
issues 1017
CutOut transform was verified in MMDetection.
Can I bring it as it is?
However, I'm worried about whether there is a copyright infringement in this PR.
paper : https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.04552
original code : CutOut, test_cutout in mmdet