IoU should ignore void class
See original GitHub issueHello, I think the provided code in evaluate.py
does not ignore the void
label in ground truth masks (which is mapped to the background in the 1D labels); therefore, the performance is underestimated compared to the results of VOC devkit. Here is the link to the line ignoring void pixels in the VOC devkit.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 7 years ago
- Reactions:1
- Comments:7 (4 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Image segmentation metrics - Keras
The ID of a class to be ignored during metric computation. This is useful, for example, in segmentation problems featuring a "void" class...
Read more >How to to drop a specific labeled pixels in semantic ...
"Ignore" label is not a label that your model can predict - it is "outside" its range. This label only exists in the...
Read more >Tutorial 84 - Intersection over Union (IoU) for ... - YouTube
Code associated with these tutorials can be downloaded from here: https://github.com/bnsreenu/python_for_image_processing_APEERThis video ...
Read more >MIoU Calculation. Computation of MIoU for Multiple-Class…
'Nanmean' is preferred than ordinary mean to ignore the cases where individual IoU value may turn out to be 'nan' because of the...
Read more >Loss Function Library - Keras & PyTorch | Kaggle
The equation for multi-class BCE by itself will be familiar to anyone who has ... The IoU metric, or Jaccard Index, is similar...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
I can confirm that with weights set the results are improved: from 76.8 mIoU to 80.1 mIoU on the validation set. I have used the code below, and will update the evaluation script accordingly. Thank you for letting know about the issue!
I have pushed the changes to the master branch. Thanks again!