-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 51
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
can not get good performance #4
Comments
Could you clone the code and released SE_GN_batchsize2_1024x512_pp_ms_me0_classbalance7_kl0.1_lr2_drop0.1_seg0.5/GTA5_50000.pth, then try the test code again? thanks |
It is my fault. I have update the download link https://drive.google.com/file/d/1smh1sbOutJwhrfK8dk-tNvonc0HLaSsw/view?usp=sharing |
Thanks your help! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Hi, I have some problems
1.for your release model:
stage 1 model (SE_GN_batchsize2_1024x512_pp_ms_me0_classbalance7_kl0.1_lr2_drop0.1_seg0.5), I test this model using your code, the mIoU is only 38.07, much lower than 45.5(stage 1 miou in MRNet paper). stage2 model(1280x640_restore_ft_GN_batchsize9_512x256_pp_ms_me0_classbalance7_kl0_lr1_drop0.2_seg0.5_BN_80_255_0.8_Noaug) is 50.34 , which is same as the report result in second paper.
2. train result
I use your released stage 1 model to generate pseudo label, then train stage 2, However, the performance is low: 43.89 for 25000.pth, 42.69 for 50000.pth, 41.98 for 100000.pth, much lower than the result in your paper. And I do not change any code except variable DATA_DIRECTORY
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: