-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
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
questions about args.use_matching
#25
Comments
I also have anothr question about the I wonder if someone try a 116-d classifier and then use the "interactiveness" classifier (i.e., a 2-d classifier) as supplement. In addition, comapred to HOI, another similar task scene graph generation (SGG) does not exist a relation class named "no_interaction", (e.g.,the VisualGenome dataset). And therefore SGG does not use mAP as metric. I wonder if it is make sense to take account into the "no_interaction" as one of the relation classes and calculate mAP as metric. After all, enumerating and annotating all possible relations between subject-object pair is usually impossible. And annotating all no_interaction sub-obj pair is also impossible |
In addition, according to the dataloader, here: Line 120 in 71c5702
The |
Yes, all models were trained with |
The HICO-DET only annotated very few no-interactive human-object pairs with a 'no-interaction' label in an image. Accurately, we directly regard the 'no-interaction' label as a common 'interactive' HOI label and didn't treat the 'no-interaction' label as a negative tag. Here, we define the human-object pairs without any annotation (including 'no-interaction') as the no-interactive pairs. |
Okay, I see. Thank you for your answer! |
Thank you for the nice work of HOI. I'm currently following your work
I have a question about the args.use_matching. It seems that you did not use the
matching_embed
when training the model.Is that true all the reported model were trained with
args.use_matching=False
?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: