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

About coordinate system refactoring #99

Open
lilkeker opened this issue May 25, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

About coordinate system refactoring #99

lilkeker opened this issue May 25, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@lilkeker
Copy link

Hi, I encountered the problem of mAP and NDS indicators being lower than your results when reproducing TransFusion_Lidar. I noticed [this],(https://github.com/XuyangBai/TransFusion#:~:text=Please%20refer%20to%20data_preparation,size%20(l%2C%20w).) The reason is that I used a higher version of mmdet3d (1.00rc4) for training and eval, mmdet3d in v1.0.0 The coordinate system has been reconstructed , Does the correct TransFusion_Lidar result only can be achieved under the lower version of mmdet3d? I now want to implement the correct TransFusion_Lidar on mmdet3d (1.00rc4), but I don’t know which parts to modify. I would be very grateful if you could give me some advice and guidance!
my result:
e0ed8441e5faca5d16e87d15d9a8ae2

@lilkeker
Copy link
Author

lilkeker commented Jun 3, 2023

Hi, I encountered the problem of mAP and NDS indicators being lower than your results when reproducing TransFusion_Lidar. I noticed [this],(https://github.com/XuyangBai/TransFusion#:~:text=Please%20refer%20to%20data_preparation,size%20(l%2C%20w).) The reason is that I used a higher version of mmdet3d (1.00rc4) for training and eval, mmdet3d in v1.0.0 The coordinate system has been reconstructed , Does the correct TransFusion_Lidar result only can be achieved under the lower version of mmdet3d? I now want to implement the correct TransFusion_Lidar on mmdet3d (1.00rc4), but I don’t know which parts to modify. I would be very grateful if you could give me some advice and guidance! my result: e0ed8441e5faca5d16e87d15d9a8ae2

I have solved the mAOE and mASE problems caused by the version, but I still cannot reach the TransFusion_Lidar index mentioned in the paper by adopting the fading strategy. My result mAP: 0.5608 NDS: 0.6438
, I noticed that many people have encountered the same problem. When I checked my Log, I found that my loss may not be normal:
2023-06-02 23:50:03,576 - mmdet - INFO - Iter [120000/120105] lr: 1.534e-08, eta: 0:01:10, time: 0.653, data_time: 0.008, memory: 5365, loss_heatmap: 0.7224, layer_-1_loss_cls: 0.1174, layer_-1_loss_bbox: 0.8705, matched_ious: 0.5250, loss: 1.7103, grad_norm: 1.0566
2023-06-02 23:50:36,541 - mmdet - INFO - Iter [120050/120105] lr: 1.149e-08, eta: 0:00:36, time: 0.659, data_time: 0.008, memory: 5365, loss_heatmap: 0.7201, layer_-1_loss_cls: 0.1169, layer_-1_loss_bbox: 0.8421, matched_ious: 0.5269, loss: 1.6791, grad_norm: 1.0716
How to solve this?

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant