-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 60
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
Substandard performance without postprocessing. #23
Comments
Thanks for the question. We follow the processing steps by prior work (Visual Semantic Role Labeling, Detecting and Recognizing Human-Object Interactions) to remove prediction scores for certain action-object pairs. You can see in the eq2 of Visual Semantic Role Labeling, C is predefined. Thus, we know the object categories that are related to a specific action class. You can simply add a
to obtain the mAP without any post-processing. |
Thank you for the quick response! I ran the testing pipeline with the above command using prior_flag = 0. On the pre-trained model provided, the mAP values obtained with prior flag = 0 are 2.38(Scenario 1) and 4.81(Scenario 2). Is such a huge drop expected? Compared to the reported mAP of 45, these are very surprising numbers. Is the contribution of this prior knowledge 'C' so significant? Thank you! |
Good Morning, Thank you! |
As I recall, we will lose around 3mAP without post-processing. The mAP should be around 42. I will check and see where is the problem. |
hi, man,do you know the metric for hico-det
hi, man did you test the vcoco or the hico-det datasets, and how did you test the model, I know just |
Good Evening,
There seems to be lot of rule based post processing being done after getting the model outputs. (Forcing prediction to be snowboarding if snowboard is present etc.). Can you report the numbers without such post processing being applied? Evaluating the model after removing post-processing is giving me very bad results, so I'm not sure if I'm doing it properly. I couldn't find any mention of such numbers in the BMVC paper.
Thank you!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: