-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 323
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
Implemented GIoU #347
Implemented GIoU #347
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #347 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 80.44% 80.52% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 101 103 +2
Lines 5687 5710 +23
==========================================
+ Hits 4575 4598 +23
Misses 1112 1112
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
@briankosw Thank you for your contribution! Let us know if you need help :] |
Hi @akihironitta! I'm trying to write tests for GIoU, but I don't have experience with |
@briankosw Sure! Mark this PR as ready for review when you're ready :] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great to see GIoU loss in bolts!
Can you add the docs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for the swift action! Would you mind having a look?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
I'm going to add a little bit more to the docstring and fix that isort failure, but that should be the final touches! |
@briankosw Also, please remember to add the summary of your change to the changelog. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
pls follow @akihironitta suggestions
This is awesome! Does it make sense to also add this to the PL metrics? |
I would keep it here for a little while and later like any other metric we may move them to PL, we just need to try they are stable and kind of standard :] |
@annikabrundyn @briankosw @Borda let's add this to PL as a class metric + the current functional form. |
Thank you for your work @briankosw |
Ah I didn't realize torchvision has its own implementation. You're correct in that we subtract giou from 1. Should I change it to use torchvision's giou? |
I think both are right. in giou loss, we subtract giou from 1. Since torchvision has giou, we only need to 1 - giou to get giou loss... So it can be said this PR is unneeded, Thank you for your work btw. But let's see core members' thoughts too! |
@briankosw @ydcjeff
I think it's reasonable to have the loss in Bolts and later migrate it to PL like @Borda mentioned. @Borda @ananyahjha93 So, how shall we move on? |
Co-authored-by: Jeff Yang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jirka Borovec <[email protected]>
Hello @briankosw! Thanks for updating this PR. There are currently no PEP 8 issues detected in this Pull Request. Cheers! 🍻 Comment last updated at 2020-12-20 23:19:48 UTC |
What does this PR do?
Implements Generalized Intersection over Union as mentioned in #251
Before submitting
PR review
Anyone in the community is free to review the PR once the tests have passed.
If we didn't discuss your PR in Github issues there's a high chance it will not be merged.
Did you have fun?
Make sure you had fun coding 🙃