-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7k
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
Add masks to boundaries #7704
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Add masks to boundaries #7704
Conversation
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/pytorch/vision/7704
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
Hi @bhack! Thank you for your pull request and welcome to our community. Action RequiredIn order to merge any pull request (code, docs, etc.), we require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement, and we don't seem to have one on file for you. ProcessIn order for us to review and merge your suggested changes, please sign at https://code.facebook.com/cla. If you are contributing on behalf of someone else (eg your employer), the individual CLA may not be sufficient and your employer may need to sign the corporate CLA. Once the CLA is signed, our tooling will perform checks and validations. Afterwards, the pull request will be tagged with If you have received this in error or have any questions, please contact us at [email protected]. Thanks! |
Thank you for signing our Contributor License Agreement. We can now accept your code for this (and any) Meta Open Source project. Thanks! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the PR @bhack , I'll take a deeper look later.
How do you would impl the test against
Yeah, we can't have openCV on the tests suite. Maybe we can create a custom tests where we draw simple masks e.g. circles or squares, fill them in, and then assert in the test that the output of masks_to_boundaries
corresponds to the contour shape?
torchvision/ops/boxes.py
Outdated
@@ -382,7 +382,39 @@ def _box_diou_iou(boxes1: Tensor, boxes2: Tensor, eps: float = 1e-7) -> Tuple[Te | |||
# distance between boxes' centers squared. | |||
return iou - (centers_distance_squared / diagonal_distance_squared), iou | |||
|
|||
def masks_to_boundaries(masks: torch.Tensor, dilation_ratio: float = 0.02) -> torch.Tensor: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess it's OK to have the implementation in this file even though this isn't related to boxed. However, I don't think we should expose it here. I think we should just expose it in from the torchvision.ops
namespace (otherwise the implementation will always have to stay in this file for BC, and that may lock us).
We probably just need to rename this to _masks_to_boundaries
and the expose it in torchvision.ops.__init__.py
like
from .boxes import import _masks_to_boundaries as masks_to_boundaries
Any other suggestion @pmeier @vfdev-5 @oke-aditya ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess it's OK to have the implementation in this file even though this isn't related to boxed.
No strong opinion, but could we maybe also have a new _masks.py
module or move it into the misc.py
one?
👍 for only exposing it in the torchvision.ops
namespace.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tbh there is demand for mask_utils. Several of them, #4415 . Candidate utils like convert_masks_format
, paste_masks_in_images
, etc. Maybe it's time to create new files mask_utils.py
and make future extensions possible?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
we can always create an ops.mask*
namespace at any time. We should only do that when we know for sure we need it, i.e. when we start having 2+ mask utils. Alls ops are exposed in the ops.
namespace anyway so there's no need to rush and create a file which will only have one single util in it ATM.
I'm OK with creating _mask.py
as well (and we can rename it into mask.py
later if we want to).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm OK with creating _mask.py as well (and we can rename it into mask.py later if we want to).
This sounds best solution! We can avoid the bloat inside this file as well as keep them private 😄
torchvision/ops/boxes.py
Outdated
n, h, w = masks.shape | ||
img_diag = math.sqrt(h ** 2 + w ** 2) | ||
dilation = int(round(dilation_ratio * img_diag)) | ||
selem_size = dilation * 2 + 1 | ||
selem = torch.ones((n, 1, selem_size, selem_size), device=masks.device) | ||
|
||
# Compute the boundaries for each mask | ||
masks = masks.float().unsqueeze(1) | ||
eroded_masks = F.conv2d(masks, selem, padding=dilation, groups=n) | ||
eroded_masks = (eroded_masks == selem.view(n, -1).sum(1, keepdim=True)).byte() # Make the output binary | ||
|
||
contours = masks.byte() - eroded_masks | ||
|
||
return contours.squeeze(1) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I do not think this code works as expected. Here is my test example and it fails in multiple places:
import torch
import numpy as np
from PIL import ImageDraw, Image
mask = torch.zeros(4, 32, 32, dtype=torch.bool)
mask[0, 1:10, 1:10] = True
mask[0, 12:20, 12:20] = True
mask[0, 15:18, 20:32] = True
mask[1, 15:23, 15:23] = True
mask[1, 22:33, 22:33] = True
mask[2, 1:5, 22:30] = True
mask[2, 5:14, 25:27] = True
pil_img = Image.new("L", (32, 32))
draw = ImageDraw.Draw(pil_img)
draw.ellipse([2, 7, 26, 26], fill=1, outline=1, width=1)
mask[3, ...] = torch.from_numpy(np.asarray(pil_img))
import math
from torch.nn import functional as F
dilation_ratio = 0.05
masks = mask.clone()
n, h, w = masks.shape
img_diag = math.sqrt(h ** 2 + w ** 2)
dilation = int(round(dilation_ratio * img_diag))
selem_size = dilation * 2 + 1
selem = torch.ones((n, 1, selem_size, selem_size), device=masks.device)
# Compute the boundaries for each mask
masks = masks.float().unsqueeze(1)
eroded_masks = F.conv2d(masks, selem, padding=dilation, groups=n)
eroded_masks = (eroded_masks == selem.view(n, -1).sum(1, keepdim=True)).byte() # Make the output binary
contours = masks.byte() - eroded_masks
contours. = contours.squeeze(1)
Error:
---> 17 eroded_masks = (eroded_masks == selem.view(n, -1).sum(1, keepdim=True)).byte() # Make the output binary
RuntimeError: The size of tensor a (32) must match the size of tensor b (4) at non-singleton dimension 2
Error is related to masks = masks.float().unsqueeze(1)
where we may need to unsqueeze(0) instead.
But if fixed like that, the next line does not make much sense IMO:
eroded_masks = (eroded_masks == selem.view(n, -1).sum(1, keepdim=True)).byte()
as eroded_masks shape wont match the size of conv weights...
Sorry, if I'm missing something...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What do you think about:
import torch
import numpy as np
from PIL import ImageDraw, Image
import math
from torch.nn import functional as F
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
mask = torch.zeros(4, 32, 32, dtype=torch.bool)
mask[0, 1:10, 1:10] = True
mask[0, 12:20, 12:20] = True
mask[0, 15:18, 20:32] = True
mask[1, 15:23, 15:23] = True
mask[1, 22:33, 22:33] = True
mask[2, 1:5, 22:30] = True
mask[2, 5:14, 25:27] = True
pil_img = Image.new("L", (32, 32))
draw = ImageDraw.Draw(pil_img)
draw.ellipse([2, 7, 26, 26], fill=1, outline=1, width=1)
mask[3, ...] = torch.from_numpy(np.asarray(pil_img))
dilation_ratio = 0.05
masks = mask.clone()
n, h, w = masks.shape
img_diag = math.sqrt(h ** 2 + w ** 2)
dilation = int(round(dilation_ratio * img_diag))
selem_size = dilation * 2 + 1
selem = torch.ones((1, 1, selem_size, selem_size), device=masks.device)
# Compute the boundaries for each mask
masks = masks.float().unsqueeze(1)
eroded_masks = torch.zeros_like(masks)
#for i in range(n):
# eroded_masks[i] = F.conv2d(masks[i].unsqueeze(0), selem, padding=dilation)
eroded_masks = F.conv2d(masks, selem, padding=dilation)
eroded_masks = (eroded_masks == selem.view(-1).sum()).byte() # Make the output binary
contours = masks.byte() - eroded_masks
contours = contours.squeeze(1)
# Visualize the results
fig, ax = plt.subplots(n, 3, figsize=(10, 10))
for i in range(n):
ax[i, 0].imshow(mask[i], cmap='gray')
ax[i, 1].imshow(eroded_masks[i].squeeze(), cmap='gray')
ax[i, 2].imshow(contours[i], cmap='gray')
plt.show()
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@bhack why do we need dilation_ratio ? I think we can do the following without extra parametrization:
masks = masks.float().unsqueeze(1)
w_size = 3
w = torch.ones((1, 1, w_size, w_size), device=masks.device) / (w_size ** 2)
eroded_masks = F.conv2d(masks, w, padding=1)
contours = (masks - eroded_masks) > 0
contours = contours.squeeze(1)
what do you think ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is in the paper official implementation
But also in the more classical F score (Davis dataset/challenge official eval kit).
As this is often a preprocessing step used in the boundary overlapping metrics (BoundaryIOU/Boundary F-Score) the dilate will give the control over the tolerance of the exact boundaries overlapping of the boundaries.
In both the papers they talked about bipartite graph matching but then they have always approximated with morphological ops.
Of you see the F/Davis case impl there is also an option where the tolerance/dilate Is defined by the input resolution.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the links. According to https://github.com/davisvideochallenge/davis2017-evaluation/blob/master/davis2017/metrics.py#L57 code, mask to boundary is done without using any parameters, see _seg2bmap
:
https://github.com/davisvideochallenge/davis2017-evaluation/blob/ac7c43fca936f9722837b7fbd337d284ba37004b/davis2017/metrics.py#L122
Anyway, I see why they have dilation_ratio
arg.
However, previously I missed the issue description and the context for this PR:
A mask to boundary API is useful for implementing many segmentation metrics used in many dataset and challenges (Davis F score, BoundaryIOU, etc..).
It could be also used more generally for visualization tasks.
In this case, I'm not very sure about torchvision's interest in following line by line what does https://github.com/bowenc0221/boundary-iou-api as 1) IMO we wont be able to reproduce cv2.erode
behaviour and 2) as such helper function can be used within a metric implementation, it should be carefully tested vs ref implementation in a lot of corner cases etc (and this is not the role of torchvision, IMO).
In general, a method to produce mask to edges (sort of edge detector) could make sense like mask to bboxes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the links. According to https://github.com/davisvideochallenge/davis2017-evaluation/blob/master/davis2017/metrics.py#L57 code, mask to boundary is done without using any parameters, see _seg2bmap:
https://github.com/davisvideochallenge/davis2017-evaluation/blob/ac7c43fca936f9722837b7fbd337d284ba37004b/davis2017/metrics.py#L122
Yes but cause in F they are dilating in an extra post-processing step in the metric instead of the BoundariesIOU
approach (see dilate disk param)
https://github.com/davisvideochallenge/davis2017-evaluation/blob/master/davis2017/metrics.py#L77
In this case, I'm not very sure about torchvision's interest in following line by line what does https://github.com/bowenc0221/boundary-iou-api as 1) IMO we wont be able to reproduce cv2.erode behaviour and 2) as such helper function can be used within a metric implementation, it should be carefully tested vs ref implementation in a lot of corner cases etc (and this is not the role of torchvision, IMO).
I've tested another early implementation with some inputs but the Boundary IOU paper reference impl doesn't have a test suite.
In general, a method to produce mask to edges (sort of edge detector) could make sense like mask to bboxes.
Let me know as I am mainly interested to achieve the metric and eventually to contribute also an intermediate function here in the case it could be compatible and useful for other contexts/domain.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see you are also a member of the MONAI project so you have already something similar but it still rely on a non-Pytorch implementation:
https://github.com/Project-MONAI/MetricsReloaded/blob/main/MetricsReloaded/metrics/pairwise_measures.py#L963
import torch
import numpy as np
from PIL import ImageDraw, Image
import math
from torch.nn import functional as F
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
# Create masks
mask = torch.zeros(4, 32, 32, dtype=torch.bool)
mask[0, 1:10, 1:10] = True
mask[0, 12:20, 12:20] = True
mask[0, 15:18, 20:32] = True
mask[1, 15:23, 15:23] = True
mask[1, 22:33, 22:33] = True
mask[2, 1:5, 22:30] = True
mask[2, 5:14, 25:27] = True
pil_img = Image.new("L", (32, 32))
draw = ImageDraw.Draw(pil_img)
draw.ellipse([2, 7, 26, 26], fill=1, outline=1, width=1)
mask[3, ...] = torch.from_numpy(np.asarray(pil_img))
# Define dilation_ratio
dilation_ratio = 0.02
# Clone masks
masks = mask.clone()
# Get the dimensions
n, h, w = masks.shape
# Compute img_diag, dilation, selem_size and selem
img_diag = math.sqrt(h ** 2 + w ** 2)
dilation = int(round(dilation_ratio * img_diag))
selem_size = dilation * 2 + 1
selem = torch.ones((n, 1, selem_size, selem_size), device=masks.device)
# Compute the boundaries for each mask
masks = masks.float().unsqueeze(1)
eroded_masks = F.conv2d(masks, selem, padding=dilation)
eroded_masks = (eroded_masks == selem.view(n, -1).sum(-1).view(n, 1, 1, 1)).byte() # Make the output binary
contours = masks.byte() - eroded_masks
# Squeeze the contours tensor
contours = contours.squeeze(1)
# Visualize the results
fig, ax = plt.subplots(n, 3, figsize=(10, 10))
for i in range(n):
ax[i, 0].imshow(mask[i], cmap='gray')
ax[i, 1].imshow(eroded_masks[i, 0].cpu(), cmap='gray')
ax[i, 2].imshow(contours[i, 0].cpu(), cmap='gray')
plt.show() |
docs/source/ops.rst
Outdated
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ The below operators perform pre-processing as well as post-processing required i | |||
|
|||
batched_nms | |||
masks_to_boxes | |||
masks_to_boudnaries |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fixed. So what we want to do?
Any news on this? Are you still interested? |
Gently ping |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the updates, but the implementation still has some problems. I left comments in the code.
Refactor test and add debug image util Refactor implementation
@NicolasHug Gently ping. |
Let me know if we want to close this as we are at the 10th month. |
Ping again, we are over 1 year. |
Fixes: #7537
How do you would impl the test against:
https://github.com/bowenc0221/boundary-iou-api/blob/master/boundary_iou/utils/boundary_utils.py#L12-L30
I suppose we don't want to add python OpenCV as a test dependecy.