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

ScanNet classification, can't obtain 9,305/2,606 training/testing instances #126

Closed
Yochengliu opened this issue Dec 17, 2018 · 7 comments
Closed

Comments

@Yochengliu
Copy link

How did you fix the benchmark files to reach 9,305/2,606 instances, as you mentioned in issue #29 ?

Can you update the benchmark files with the fixed files (maybe scannet-labels.combined.tsv and classes_ObjClassification-ShapeNetCore55.txt in ./data_conversions)? Thanks.

@MingChaoSun
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi,

I think the cannet-labels.combined.tsv and classes_ObjClassification-ShapeNetCore55.txt in ./data_conversions are fixed files.

Thanks,
Mingchao

@Yochengliu
Copy link
Author

Really? But I extracted the instances exactly following your instructions, and nearly got the same instances as #29 , i.e., 7814/2169, rather than 9,305/2,606.

I have checked the scannet-labels.combined.tsv and classes_ObjClassification-ShapeNetCore55.txt carefully, and I found the label name problem seemed to be still exist.

Is there anything I mistake? Thanks.

@MingChaoSun
Copy link
Collaborator

Sorry, I uploaded the wrong file before. T_T
I just updated the tsv file.

@Yochengliu
Copy link
Author

Ok, I'll try it at once. Thank you very much!

@Yochengliu
Copy link
Author

Using the updated tsv file, I get 9423/2634 instances rather than 9,305/2,606. It seems that there is something wrong, or are 9423/2634 instances also okay? Could you please have a check? Thanks.

@MingChaoSun
Copy link
Collaborator

This tsv file has been modified several times, so there is a small gap from the version one year ago. Compared with the original version, it should have corrected more label errors,therefore, a little more instances is reasonable.

@Yochengliu
Copy link
Author

Ok, I get it. Thank you very much.

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

2 participants