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

[REQUEST] #30

Closed
surajpaib opened this issue May 23, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #31
Closed

[REQUEST] #30

surajpaib opened this issue May 23, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #31
Labels
improvement New feature or request

Comments

@surajpaib
Copy link

surajpaib commented May 23, 2020

Problem Faced:
Backprop visualize doesn't consider models with grayscale input.

Description:
Refer to this line:

module.in_channels == 3:

In this line we add a check for 3 channels which results in skipping grayscale inputs to the conv layer

My current workaround:
I have a copy of the backprop class with the in_channels set to 1 for my grayscale image use case.

Possible Fix:
Would it make sense to remove the in_channels == 3 check since the first conv would be where the input image is supplied and should be good to register the hook at or am I missing something important here?

@MisaOgura
Copy link
Owner

MisaOgura commented May 28, 2020

Hi @surajpaib, thanks for the request!

Accommodating for models that handle greyscale input images definitely makes sense in terms of improving the versatility of the tool.

I have opened a PR for this (#31) and will release a new version after the merge.

@MisaOgura
Copy link
Owner

Hi @surajpaib,

The latest version 0.1.3 implements this improvement.

It would be great if you could use this version and see if it provides the functionality you require.

Many thanks!

@surajpaib
Copy link
Author

@MisaOgura Perfect! Will test it over the weekend and report my findings, if any! Thanks

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
improvement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants