Set of methods to ensemble boxes from different object detection models, including implementation of "Weighted boxes fusion (WBF)" method.

Overview

DOI

Weighted boxes fusion

Repository contains Python implementation of several methods for ensembling boxes from object detection models:

  • Non-maximum Suppression (NMS)
  • Soft-NMS [1]
  • Non-maximum weighted (NMW) [2]
  • Weighted boxes fusion (WBF) [3] - new method which gives better results comparing to others

Requirements

Python 3.*, Numpy, Numba

Installation

pip install ensemble-boxes

Usage examples

Coordinates for boxes expected to be normalized e.g in range [0; 1]. Order: x1, y1, x2, y2.

Example of boxes ensembling for 2 models below.

  • First model predicts 5 boxes, second model predicts 4 boxes.
  • Confidence scores for each box model 1: [0.9, 0.8, 0.2, 0.4, 0.7]
  • Confidence scores for each box model 2: [0.5, 0.8, 0.7, 0.3]
  • Labels (classes) for each box model 1: [0, 1, 0, 1, 1]
  • Labels (classes) for each box model 2: [1, 1, 1, 0]
  • We set weight for 1st model to be 2, and weight for second model to be 1.
  • We set intersection over union for boxes to be match: iou_thr = 0.5
  • We skip boxes with confidence lower than skip_box_thr = 0.0001
from ensemble_boxes import *

boxes_list = [[
    [0.00, 0.51, 0.81, 0.91],
    [0.10, 0.31, 0.71, 0.61],
    [0.01, 0.32, 0.83, 0.93],
    [0.02, 0.53, 0.11, 0.94],
    [0.03, 0.24, 0.12, 0.35],
],[
    [0.04, 0.56, 0.84, 0.92],
    [0.12, 0.33, 0.72, 0.64],
    [0.38, 0.66, 0.79, 0.95],
    [0.08, 0.49, 0.21, 0.89],
]]
scores_list = [[0.9, 0.8, 0.2, 0.4, 0.7], [0.5, 0.8, 0.7, 0.3]]
labels_list = [[0, 1, 0, 1, 1], [1, 1, 1, 0]]
weights = [2, 1]

iou_thr = 0.5
skip_box_thr = 0.0001
sigma = 0.1

boxes, scores, labels = nms(boxes_list, scores_list, labels_list, weights=weights, iou_thr=iou_thr)
boxes, scores, labels = soft_nms(boxes_list, scores_list, labels_list, weights=weights, iou_thr=iou_thr, sigma=sigma, thresh=skip_box_thr)
boxes, scores, labels = non_maximum_weighted(boxes_list, scores_list, labels_list, weights=weights, iou_thr=iou_thr, skip_box_thr=skip_box_thr)
boxes, scores, labels = weighted_boxes_fusion(boxes_list, scores_list, labels_list, weights=weights, iou_thr=iou_thr, skip_box_thr=skip_box_thr)

Single model

If you need to apply NMS or any other method to single model predictions you can call function like that:

from ensemble_boxes import *
# Merge boxes for single model predictions
boxes, scores, labels = weighted_boxes_fusion([boxes_list], [scores_list], [labels_list], weights=None, method=method, iou_thr=iou_thr, thresh=thresh)

More examples can be found in example.py

3D version

There is support for 3D boxes in WBF method with weighted_boxes_fusion_3d function. Check example of usage in example_3d.py

Accuracy and speed comparison

Comparison was made for ensemble of 5 different object detection models predictions trained on Open Images Dataset (500 classes).

Model scores at local validation:

  • Model 1: mAP(0.5) 0.5164
  • Model 2: mAP(0.5) 0.5019
  • Model 3: mAP(0.5) 0.5144
  • Model 4: mAP(0.5) 0.5152
  • Model 5: mAP(0.5) 0.4910
Method mAP(0.5) Result Best params Elapsed time (sec)
NMS 0.5642 IOU Thr: 0.5 47
Soft-NMS 0.5616 Sigma: 0.1, Confidence Thr: 0.001 88
NMW 0.5667 IOU Thr: 0.5 171
WBF 0.5982 IOU Thr: 0.6 249

You can download model predictions as well as ground truth labels from here: test_data.zip

Ensemble script for them is available here: example_oid.py

We also published large benchmark based on COCO dataset here.

Description of WBF method and citation

If you find this code useful please cite:

@article{solovyev2021weighted,
  title={Weighted boxes fusion: Ensembling boxes from different object detection models},
  author={Solovyev, Roman and Wang, Weimin and Gabruseva, Tatiana},
  journal={Image and Vision Computing},
  pages={1-6},
  year={2021},
  publisher={Elsevier}
}
Comments
  • Add simple confidence averaging strategy

    Add simple confidence averaging strategy

    Hi, @ZFTurbo. Now, I'm reading your paper and this repo, and I might identify the cause of the issue discussed in #10. I am describing what a cause is in the following sections.

    To fix this issue, I made a PR that proposes another conf_type. Note that this modification can change confidence score, but not any bbox coordinates.

    I'm not an expert, so I may have missed something important. If so, please feel free to point it out. I appreciate it if you review this, and I hope this PR will contribute to the community.

    Problem

    The weighted_boxes_fusion can return confidence score larger than 1.0 regardless of the allows_overflow parameter.

    This is a reproducable example.

    from ensemble_boxes import *
    
    boxes_list = [[
        [0.1, 0.1, 0.2, 0.2],
        [0.1, 0.1, 0.2, 0.2],
        
    ],[
        [0.3, 0.3, 0.4, 0.4],
    ]]
    scores_list = [[1.0, 1.0], [0.5]]
    labels_list = [[0, 0], [0]]
    weights = [2, 1]
    
    iou_thr = 0.5
    skip_box_thr = 0.0001
    sigma = 0.1
    
    boxes, scores, labels = weighted_boxes_fusion(boxes_list, scores_list, labels_list, weights=weights, iou_thr=iou_thr, skip_box_thr=skip_box_thr, allows_overflow=True)
    print(scores)
    # [1.33333337 0.16666667]
    
    boxes, scores, labels = weighted_boxes_fusion(boxes_list, scores_list, labels_list, weights=weights, iou_thr=iou_thr, skip_box_thr=skip_box_thr, allows_overflow=False)
    print(scores)
    # [1.33333337 0.16666667]
    

    Why?

    According to the paper^[1], the confidence score is given by the eq.(1) and (5). Combining the two equations, we can get the following equation.

    C = \frac{\sum_i^TC_i}{T} \frac{min(W, T))}{W}.
    

    Since the current implementation has taken into account the weights, we should rewrite the equation. If we expand min(...) part explicitly, the resulting equation looks like this:

    \begin{align*}
    C &= \frac{\sum_i^T w_i C_i}{T} \frac{min(W, T))}{W}, \\
      &= \begin{cases} 
            \frac{\sum_i^T w_i c_i}{T}, & W \le T \\
            \frac{\sum_i^T w_i c_i}{W}, & W > T
         \end{cases}
    \end{align*},
    

    where the w_i is a weight per box, and the W denotes the total weights over the models (weight.sum()).

    The last equation implies that the result is unbounded if w_i's are not unbounded. In the above case, we can calculate C = 2*1 + 2*1 / 3 = 1.33..., (W = 3, T = 2). This is why the result can be larger than 1.0.

    A proposal to fix

    In this PR, I propose the following simple weighted average.

    C = \frac{\sum_i^Tw_iC_i}{\sum_i^T{w_i}} 
    

    Note that the denominator is a weights sum over the boxes of a cluster (not over the models weight.sum()). Apparently, this is bounded in [0, 1] if the input scores are bounded in [0, 1].

    Note that using the normalized weight (to make sure weight.sum == 1) does not fix the issue. If you use normalized weight, the resulting scores will be underestimated by dividing T or W.

    This is a weighted_avg version example.

    boxes_list = [[
        [0.1, 0.1, 0.2, 0.2],
        [0.1, 0.1, 0.2, 0.2],
        
    ],[
        [0.3, 0.3, 0.4, 0.4],
    ]]
    scores_list = [[1.0, 1.0], [0.5]]
    labels_list = [[0, 0], [0]]
    weights = [2, 1]
    
    iou_thr = 0.5
    skip_box_thr = 0.0001
    sigma = 0.1
    
    boxes, scores, labels = weighted_boxes_fusion(boxes_list, scores_list, labels_list, weights=weights, iou_thr=iou_thr, skip_box_thr=skip_box_thr, allows_overflow=False, conf_type='weighted_avg')
    print(scores)
    # [1.  0.5]
    
    ## use other scores
    scores_list = [[0.8, 1.0], [0.5]]
    boxes, scores, labels = weighted_boxes_fusion(boxes_list, scores_list, labels_list, weights=weights, iou_thr=iou_thr, skip_box_thr=skip_box_thr, allows_overflow=False, conf_type='weighted_avg')
    print(scores)
    # [0.89999998 0.5]
    

    Performance

    Sorry, I did not conduct any performance experiments. So, I have no idea how much of an impact this fix will have on performance at this point.

    [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.13302

    opened by i-aki-y 8
  • How to find the optimal hyper-parameters in the ensembling process

    How to find the optimal hyper-parameters in the ensembling process

    Hello, I would like to ask how to find the best parameters combination, such as the model importances, IOU threshold when performing the ensemble process? Now I got prediction results from different models and try to ensemble these predictions, but I cannot know how to find the optimal parameters. Any suggestions will be helpful! Thank you in advance.

    opened by 123dddd 6
  • run NMS on empty bounding box from one of ensembled models

    run NMS on empty bounding box from one of ensembled models

    Hi, I tried to ensemble 5 models. if there is no bounding box detected from one of 5 models, the nms gives error as follow :

    ValueError                                Traceback (most recent call last)
    Input In [39], in <cell line: 14>()
         12 lebar = dict_pred[img.split('\\')[-1].split('.')[0]]['image_width']
         13 tinggi = dict_pred[img.split('\\')[-1].split('.')[0]]['image_height']
    ---> 14 boxes, scores, labels = nms_method(bbox_list, conf_list, cat_list, method=2, weights=weights, iou_thr=0.3, sigma=0.05, thresh=0.001)
    
    File ~\Anaconda3\envs\SiT\lib\site-packages\ensemble_boxes\ensemble_boxes_nms.py:187, in nms_method(boxes, scores, labels, method, iou_thr, sigma, thresh, weights)
        184             scores[i] = (np.array(scores[i]) * weights[i]) / weights.sum()
        186 # We concatenate everything
    --> 187 boxes = np.concatenate(boxes)
        188 scores = np.concatenate(scores)
        189 labels = np.concatenate(labels)
    
    File <__array_function__ internals>:5, in concatenate(*args, **kwargs)
    
    ValueError: all the input arrays must have same number of dimensions, but the array at index 0 has 2 dimension(s) and the array at index 3 has 1 dimension(s)
    

    If I used wbf method, it runs succesfully. is there any solution to run nms in this situation like wbf does. please advise

    thank you regards

    opened by ramdhan1989 5
  • Incorrect allows_overflow=False mode

    Incorrect allows_overflow=False mode

    Example:

    from ensemble_boxes import *
    
    weigths = [0.2, 0.2, 0.2, 0.2, 0.2]
    pred_boxes = []
    pred_scores = []
    pred_labels = []
    for _ in range(5):
        pred_boxes.append([[0.    , 0.    , 0.0001, 0.0001]])
        pred_scores.append([1.])
        pred_labels.append([0])
    
    pred_boxes, pred_scores, pred_labels = weighted_boxes_fusion(
        pred_boxes,
        pred_scores,
        pred_labels,
        weights=weigths,
        iou_thr=0.4,
        skip_box_thr=0.,
        allows_overflow=False
    )
    print(pred_scores)
    

    Actual result: score [0.2] Expected result: score [1]

    Probably we need to change the line weighted_boxes[i][1] = weighted_boxes[i][1] * min(weights.sum(), len(clustered_boxes)) / weights.sum() -> weighted_boxes[i][1] = weighted_boxes[i][1] * min(len(weights), len(clustered_boxes)) / weights.sum()

    opened by Sergey-Zlobin 5
  • Strange behavior of weighted_boxes_fusion

    Strange behavior of weighted_boxes_fusion

    @ZFTurbo

    boxes = [
        [[410, 464, 354, 410],
        [511, 89, 470, 32],
        [503, 213, 447, 166],
        [300, 444, 252, 391],
        [290, 184, 234, 133]],
        
        [[354, 412, 409, 463],
        [447, 165, 504, 212],
        [251, 392, 299, 444],
        [470, 35, 511, 90],
        [187, 316, 240, 378]],
    
        [[447, 166, 503, 213],
        [355, 412, 411, 464],
        [470, 33, 511, 88],
        [251, 391, 300, 444],
        [234, 132, 289, 184]],
    
        [[251, 391, 300, 445],
        [354, 412, 410, 463],
        [447, 166, 503, 212],
        [235, 134, 289, 184],
        [191, 316, 239, 380]],
    
        [[410, 465, 355, 412],
        [511, 88, 470, 33],
        [504, 213, 448, 167],
        [299, 444, 251, 392],
        [289, 185, 236, 133]]
    ]
    
    scores = [
        [0.893,0.886,0.865,0.864,0.801],
        [0.915,0.881,0.873,0.852,0.844],
        [0.896, 0.895,0.860,0.855,0.801],
        [0.900,0.889,0.861,0.838,0.831],
        [0.897,0.877, 0.877,0.861,0.820],
    ]
    
    labels = [
        [1, 1, 1, 1, 1],
        [1, 1, 1, 1, 1],
        [1, 1, 1, 1, 1],
        [1, 1, 1, 1, 1],
        [1, 1, 1, 1, 1]
    ]
    
    wbf_boxes, wbf_scores, wbf_labels = ensemble_boxes.ensemble_boxes_wbf.weighted_boxes_fusion(boxes, scores, labels, weights=None, iou_thr=0.43, skip_box_thr=0.44)
    
    wbf_boxes.shape
    >>> (16, 4)
    

    I think we see excess wbf_boxes, it is very strange. Picture with demonstration:

    Без названия (1)

    Python 3.7.6 numpy==1.18.1 ensemble_boxes==1.0.1

    opened by shonenkov 5
  • Why does my ensemble still have so many repetitive (IoU > thresh I set) bboxes?

    Why does my ensemble still have so many repetitive (IoU > thresh I set) bboxes?

    Thank you for your code.

    However, when I use this method, I have so many repetitive bboxes. Do you have some advices?

    Code is following: boxes, score12, label = example_nms_2_models(boxes_list, labels_list, scores_list, draw_image=False, method=3, iou_thr=0.5, thresh=0.1, sigma=0.5)

    I just use nms method because the limitation of running time. An example of results is following: (Pdb) boxes array([[0.73385417, 0.34259259, 0.81041667, 0.45648148], [0.74930206, 0.36653722, 0.79911662, 0.45000624]]) The labels are same. Obviously, the IoU of these two boxes should be over than 0.5. Looks like NMS doen not work in ensemble. Right?

    opened by RainbowSun11Q2H 5
  • Speed up find_matching_box bottleneck

    Speed up find_matching_box bottleneck

    When using weighted boxes fusion with a couple thousand detections it quickly becomes very slow requiring significantly longer than the inference. The bottleneck turned out to be the find_matching_box function which is called n*n times for n detections. Vectorisation of this function with numpy speeds up the function by a factor of around 100 and makes the weighted boxes fusion time negligible next to the inference time.

    opened by bartonp2 4
  • Strange result if boxes are intersected inside one model

    Strange result if boxes are intersected inside one model

    Example:

    from ensemble_boxes import *
    
    boxes_list = [[
        [0.1, 0.1, 0.2, 0.2],
        [0.1, 0.1, 0.2, 0.2],
    ], [
        [0.3, 0.3, 0.4, 0.4],
    ]]
    scores_list = [[1.0, 1.0], [0.5]]
    labels_list = [[0, 0], [0]]
    weights = [2, 1]
    
    iou_thr = 0.5
    skip_box_thr = 0.0001
    
    boxes, scores, labels = weighted_boxes_fusion(boxes_list, scores_list, labels_list, weights=weights, iou_thr=iou_thr,
                                                  skip_box_thr=skip_box_thr, allows_overflow=False
                                                  )
    print(scores)
    

    Actual result: [1.33333337 0.16666667] Expected result: scores are <= 1.

    opened by Sergey-Zlobin 2
  • Sould the

    Sould the "break" change to "continue"

    https://github.com/ZFTurbo/Weighted-Boxes-Fusion/blob/d48402e487dcdf9a5b4e519ed0ef254f233c3fd6/ensemble_boxes/ensemble_boxes_wbf.py#L35

    Hi I do not see why this should break,if one prediction is bad,we should just ignore instead of jumping out of loop unless this list is sorted?

    Thanks!

    opened by EvanAlbee 2
  • Incorrect conf_type='max' mode

    Incorrect conf_type='max' mode

    Example:

    from ensemble_boxes import *
    
    boxes_list = [[
        [0.1, 0.1, 0.2, 0.2],
    ], [
        [0.1, 0.1, 0.2, 0.2],
    ]]
    scores_list = [[1], [1]]
    labels_list = [[0], [0]]
    weights = [1, 3]
    
    iou_thr = 0.5
    skip_box_thr = 0.0001
    
    boxes, scores, labels = weighted_boxes_fusion(boxes_list, scores_list, labels_list, weights=weights, iou_thr=iou_thr,
                                                  skip_box_thr=skip_box_thr, allows_overflow=True, conf_type='max'
                                                  )
    print(scores)
    

    Actual result: [1.5] Expected result: [1]

    opened by Sergey-Zlobin 1
  • I've found typo in your title!

    I've found typo in your title!

    Set of methods to ensemble boxes from object detection models, inlcuding implementation of "Weighted boxes fusion (WBF)" method.

    inlcuding -> including

    Thank you!

    opened by Bluespen 1
  • 2d bbox wbf compute result error

    2d bbox wbf compute result error

    from ensemble_boxes import *
    
    box_list = [[[0.3186783194541931, 0.7567034912109375, 0.3458101451396942, 0.8225753173828125],
                 [0.2893345057964325, 0.7414910888671875, 0.30395767092704773, 0.82741845703125],
                 [0.08234874159097672, 0.7192938232421875, 0.10110706090927124, 0.7978226318359375],
                 [0.03901633247733116, 0.6389908447265625, 0.08065500855445862, 0.794277587890625],
                 [0.10205534100532532, 0.7005220947265625, 0.3009164333343506, 0.8869298095703125],
                 [0.013241510838270187, 0.7410292358398437, 0.4873046875, 0.9892860717773437],
                 [0.20103125274181366, 0.6678619384765625, 0.2735580503940582, 0.8197706298828125],
                 [0.2807173728942871, 0.748069091796875, 0.34884029626846313, 0.8265133056640624]],
                [[499.8333263993263, 0.7574194946289062, 499.8582033813, 0.8213037719726562],
                 [499.80139984190464, 0.744067626953125, 499.8154309540987, 0.83922900390625],
                 [499.79503624141216, 0.7509530639648437, 499.86309084296227, 0.8289489135742187],
                 [499.52070143818855, 0.7752119750976563, 500.0, 0.9840308227539063],
                 [499.5126953125, 0.5068761901855469, 499.98771003447473, 0.74507958984375]],
                [[0.31953710317611694, 0.758130859375, 0.34634509682655334, 0.821462158203125],
                 [0.2890157401561737, 0.7444622192382813, 0.3044307231903076, 0.8266027221679687],
                 [0.008551719598472118, 0.4673032836914062, 0.36901113390922546, 0.7606300659179688],
                 [0.0, 0.4736612548828125, 0.4354751706123352, 0.738594970703125],
                 [0.004452536813914776, 0.7197838134765625, 0.4873046875, 1.0818572998046876],
                 [0.0, 0.7836503295898437, 0.4873046875, 0.9610354614257812],
                 [0.0, 0.4444543762207031, 0.4644381105899811, 0.7153197021484375],
                 [0.0, 0.4595667419433594, 0.45853325724601746, 0.745251220703125]],
                [[0.31933701038360596, 0.7575816040039063, 0.3459422290325165, 0.8217849731445312],
                 [0.2892712652683258, 0.742080322265625, 0.3039073348045349, 0.82669189453125],
                 [0.08082691580057144, 0.7194573364257812, 0.10114574432373047, 0.7929706420898438],
                 [0.014002567157149315, 0.73406103515625, 0.4873046875, 1.049856201171875],
                 [0.0058621931821107864, 0.485712646484375, 0.39766108989715576, 0.765383544921875],
                 [0.0058621931821107864, 0.485712646484375, 0.39766108989715576, 0.765383544921875],
                 [0.0010756775736808777, 0.7905551147460937, 0.4873046875, 0.9734806518554687]],
                [[0.3187095522880554, 0.7571224365234375, 0.34541282057762146, 0.82177685546875],
                 [0.2895776629447937, 0.7409693603515625, 0.3036201298236847, 0.8277974853515625],
                 [0.09533613175153732, 0.6792424926757813, 0.2974565327167511, 0.8962586059570312],
                 [0.08239483088254929, 0.720238525390625, 0.10080346465110779, 0.7970889892578125],
                 [0.03715477138757706, 0.6399656372070313, 0.08126747608184814, 0.7963726196289063],
                 [0.11268552392721176, 0.6827256469726563, 0.12404713779687881, 0.7254093627929687],
                 [0.13349150121212006, 0.6368695678710937, 0.14964361488819122, 0.6750675659179688],
                 [0.15557613968849182, 0.6638201904296875, 0.28306907415390015, 0.858079833984375],
                 [0.01832456886768341, 0.7675958251953126, 0.47474271059036255, 0.944915283203125],
                 [0.4468492865562439, 0.6279349975585937, 0.4620358347892761, 0.6685007934570313]],
                [[0.3194415271282196, 0.7588555908203125, 0.3447743058204651, 0.8150806884765625],
                 [0.0741792619228363, 0.6543595581054688, 0.3116285800933838, 0.9023289184570312],
                 [0.08234858512878418, 0.7222454223632813, 0.10103598982095718, 0.7950789184570313],
                 [0.13459675014019012, 0.6382381591796875, 0.1480436772108078, 0.6662626953125],
                 [0.28921717405319214, 0.738470703125, 0.3036784827709198, 0.8197808837890626],
                 [0.007326365448534489, 0.7826550903320313, 0.4597592055797577, 0.9532874145507813],
                 [0.0, 0.6689840087890625, 0.0, 0.70613916015625]]]
    
    score_list = [[0.83423, 0.79483235, 0.6388512, 0.18261029, 0.14935824, 0.088351235, 0.08091657, 0.07652432],
                  [0.879186, 0.60111153, 0.14815152, 0.14187415, 0.063758574],
                  [0.5681963, 0.4344975, 0.31340924, 0.21414337, 0.14648718, 0.07502777, 0.06623978, 0.06619557],
                  [0.7660579, 0.6813378, 0.24239238, 0.11751874, 0.11032326, 0.10366057, 0.074862376],
                  [0.8430377, 0.82931787, 0.7683554, 0.6823021, 0.28933194, 0.18235974, 0.17097037, 0.09869627, 0.08994506, 0.079594925],
                  [0.78075427, 0.7309819, 0.6295794, 0.48739368, 0.39831838, 0.073874675, 0.059466254]]
    
    label_list = [[6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 9, 7, 6],
                  [6, 6, 6, 9, 11],
                  [6, 6, 13, 11, 13, 9, 8, 0],
                  [6, 6, 6, 13, 11, 13, 9],
                  [6, 6, 7, 6, 7, 6, 6, 7, 9, 6],
                  [6, 7, 6, 6, 6, 9, 6]]
    
    weights = [1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1]
    box_list, score_list, label_list = weighted_boxes_fusion(box_list, score_list, label_list,
                                                             weights=weights, iou_thr=0.5,
                                                             skip_box_thr=0.1)
    print(box_list)
    print(score_list)
    print(label_list)
    

    and the result is:

    [[0.31910411 0.75763094 0.34561539 0.82052845]
    [0.28932601 0.7415092  0.30388758 0.82627851]
    [0.08219483 0.72045314 0.10099649 0.79627055]
    [0.08656451 0.67013788 0.3040534  0.89810479]
    [0.13430972 0.63788271 0.14845915 0.66854924]
    [0.03787507 0.63958848 0.0810305  0.79556197]
    [0.00788325 0.47187883 0.37613192 0.76181149]
    [0.00199323 0.47775888 0.42261785 0.74770349]
    [0.00870361 0.72613913 0.48730466 1.        ]
    [0.11268552 0.68272565 0.12404714 0.72540936]]
    [0.63204601 0.52305063 0.36552083 0.2747826  0.10972734 0.07865704
    0.06951164 0.05407777 0.04400099 0.03039329]
    [ 6.  6.  6.  7.  6.  7. 13. 11. 13.  6.]
    

    The low confidence box that lower than 0.1 (skip_box_thr) not be filtrated.

    opened by VariableXX 0
  • Single instance NMS

    Single instance NMS

    I'm after NMS over classes, but by default most implementations just do within class. Can't work out if over classes is implemented by this tool / repo?

    See yolo discussion https://github.com/ultralytics/yolov5/issues/2162

    (struggling to work with that implementation, not obvious what the format of the input predictions is)

    opened by GeorgePearse 0
  • label list on SSD

    label list on SSD

    Hello, I'm building an ensemble object detection model with two SSD head detectors. In this implementation the labels of the predicted model are stored with the corresponding conf scores and the bbox coordinates.

    In SSD, though, the model doesn't produce the corresponding label during the detection.

    Is there any way to make sense this implementation when using SSD as the detector or does anyone have any input on this matter? Looking forward for sharing!

    opened by ksmdnl 1
  • Building wheel for llvmlite ... error

    Building wheel for llvmlite ... error

    hi there, maybe this is not a issue but an error that I faced when I install ensemble_boxes with the following command:

    pip install ensemble_boxes

    My environment is Jetson Xavier:

    • Ubuntu:18.04 LTS
    • ARMv8 Processor rev 0 (v8l) × 6
    • NVIDIA Tegra Xavier (nvgpu)/integrated
    • Conda 4.10.3

    To reproduce: 1 create a conda environment named pytorch1 2 install pytorch via the following link https://forums.developer.nvidia.com/t/pytorch-for-jetson-version-1-10-now-available/72048 In my case, I used the python 3.6 and pytorch v1.10.0 3 After successful installed use 'pip install ensemble_boxes'

    4 No error if I use python 3.8 and with cpu version pytorch.

    Error occurs:

    (pytorch1) [email protected]:~/Github/$ pip install ensemble_boxes Collecting ensemble_boxes Using cached ensemble_boxes-1.0.8-py3-none-any.whl (21 kB) Collecting numba Using cached numba-0.53.1-cp36-cp36m-linux_aarch64.whl Requirement already satisfied: numpy in /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/lib/python3.6/site-packages (from ensemble_boxes) (1.19.5) Requirement already satisfied: pandas in /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/lib/python3.6/site-packages (from ensemble_boxes) (1.1.5) Collecting llvmlite<0.37,>=0.36.0rc1 Using cached llvmlite-0.36.0.tar.gz (126 kB) Preparing metadata (setup.py) ... done Requirement already satisfied: setuptools in /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/lib/python3.6/site-packages (from numba->ensemble_boxes) (59.5.0) Requirement already satisfied: python-dateutil>=2.7.3 in /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/lib/python3.6/site-packages (from pandas->ensemble_boxes) (2.8.2) Requirement already satisfied: pytz>=2017.2 in /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/lib/python3.6/site-packages (from pandas->ensemble_boxes) (2021.3) Requirement already satisfied: six>=1.5 in /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/lib/python3.6/site-packages (from python-dateutil>=2.7.3->pandas->ensemble_boxes) (1.16.0) Building wheels for collected packages: llvmlite Building wheel for llvmlite (setup.py) ... error ERROR: Command errored out with exit status 1: command: /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/bin/python3.6 -u -c 'import io, os, sys, setuptools, tokenize; sys.argv[0] = '"'"'/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/setup.py'"'"'; file='"'"'/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/setup.py'"'"';f = getattr(tokenize, '"'"'open'"'"', open)(file) if os.path.exists(file) else io.StringIO('"'"'from setuptools import setup; setup()'"'"');code = f.read().replace('"'"'\r\n'"'"', '"'"'\n'"'"');f.close();exec(compile(code, file, '"'"'exec'"'"'))' bdist_wheel -d /tmp/pip-wheel-lykc90s6 cwd: /tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/ Complete output (11 lines): running bdist_wheel /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/bin/python3.6 /tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/ffi/build.py LLVM version... Traceback (most recent call last): File "/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/ffi/build.py", line 220, in main() File "/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/ffi/build.py", line 210, in main main_posix('linux', '.so') File "/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/ffi/build.py", line 134, in main_posix raise RuntimeError(msg) from None RuntimeError: Could not find a llvm-config binary. There are a number of reasons this could occur, please see: https://llvmlite.readthedocs.io/en/latest/admin-guide/install.html#using-pip for help. error: command '/home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/bin/python3.6' failed with exit status 1

    ERROR: Failed building wheel for llvmlite Running setup.py clean for llvmlite Failed to build llvmlite Installing collected packages: llvmlite, numba, ensemble-boxes Running setup.py install for llvmlite ... error ERROR: Command errored out with exit status 1: command: /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/bin/python3.6 -u -c 'import io, os, sys, setuptools, tokenize; sys.argv[0] = '"'"'/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/setup.py'"'"'; file='"'"'/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/setup.py'"'"';f = getattr(tokenize, '"'"'open'"'"', open)(file) if os.path.exists(file) else io.StringIO('"'"'from setuptools import setup; setup()'"'"');code = f.read().replace('"'"'\r\n'"'"', '"'"'\n'"'"');f.close();exec(compile(code, file, '"'"'exec'"'"'))' install --record /tmp/pip-record-hho726u9/install-record.txt --single-version-externally-managed --compile --install-headers /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/include/python3.6m/llvmlite cwd: /tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/ Complete output (16 lines): running install /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/lib/python3.6/site-packages/setuptools/command/install.py:37: SetuptoolsDeprecationWarning: setup.py install is deprecated. Use build and pip and other standards-based tools. setuptools.SetuptoolsDeprecationWarning, running build got version from file /tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/llvmlite/_version.py {'version': '0.36.0', 'full': 'e6bb8d137d922bec8beeb01a237254778759becd'} running build_ext /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/bin/python3.6 /tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/ffi/build.py LLVM version... Traceback (most recent call last): File "/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/ffi/build.py", line 220, in main() File "/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/ffi/build.py", line 210, in main main_posix('linux', '.so') File "/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/ffi/build.py", line 134, in main_posix raise RuntimeError(msg) from None RuntimeError: Could not find a llvm-config binary. There are a number of reasons this could occur, please see: https://llvmlite.readthedocs.io/en/latest/admin-guide/install.html#using-pip for help. error: command '/home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/bin/python3.6' failed with exit status 1 ---------------------------------------- ERROR: Command errored out with exit status 1: /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/bin/python3.6 -u -c 'import io, os, sys, setuptools, tokenize; sys.argv[0] = '"'"'/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/setup.py'"'"'; file='"'"'/tmp/pip-install-v9ddsi1d/llvmlite_c662f38a09a547d3aac9a4c30baebe97/setup.py'"'"';f = getattr(tokenize, '"'"'open'"'"', open)(file) if os.path.exists(file) else io.StringIO('"'"'from setuptools import setup; setup()'"'"');code = f.read().replace('"'"'\r\n'"'"', '"'"'\n'"'"');f.close();exec(compile(code, file, '"'"'exec'"'"'))' install --record /tmp/pip-record-hho726u9/install-record.txt --single-version-externally-managed --compile --install-headers /home/user/anaconda3/envs/pytorch1/include/python3.6m/llvmlite Check the logs for full command output.

    opened by jeffenhuang 1
  • Compatibility for Instance Segmentation

    Compatibility for Instance Segmentation

    I'm not actually suggesting to do wbf or nms on masks but I think those methods should be compatible with masks for instance segmentation. I haven't tried any methods in this repository for instance segmentation yet but I think it makes sense to get more refined masks with wbf and nms.

    I'm currently doing this by adding masks argument to prepare_boxes and nms_method functions.

    def prepare_boxes(boxes, scores, labels, masks=None):
        result_boxes = boxes.copy()
    
        cond = (result_boxes < 0)
        cond_sum = cond.astype(np.int32).sum()
        if cond_sum > 0:
            print('Warning. Fixed {} boxes coordinates < 0'.format(cond_sum))
            result_boxes[cond] = 0
    
        cond = (result_boxes > 1)
        cond_sum = cond.astype(np.int32).sum()
        if cond_sum > 0:
            print('Warning. Fixed {} boxes coordinates > 1. Check that your boxes was normalized at [0, 1]'.format(cond_sum))
            result_boxes[cond] = 1
    
        boxes1 = result_boxes.copy()
        result_boxes[:, 0] = np.min(boxes1[:, [0, 2]], axis=1)
        result_boxes[:, 2] = np.max(boxes1[:, [0, 2]], axis=1)
        result_boxes[:, 1] = np.min(boxes1[:, [1, 3]], axis=1)
        result_boxes[:, 3] = np.max(boxes1[:, [1, 3]], axis=1)
    
        area = (result_boxes[:, 2] - result_boxes[:, 0]) * (result_boxes[:, 3] - result_boxes[:, 1])
        cond = (area == 0)
        cond_sum = cond.astype(np.int32).sum()
        if cond_sum > 0:
            print('Warning. Removed {} boxes with zero area!'.format(cond_sum))
            result_boxes = result_boxes[area > 0]
            scores = scores[area > 0]
            labels = labels[area > 0]
            if masks is not None:
                masks = masks[area > 0]
    
        return result_boxes, scores, labels, masks
    
    def nms_method(boxes, scores, labels, masks=None, method=3, iou_thr=0.5, sigma=0.5, thresh=0.001, weights=None):
        """
        :param boxes: list of boxes predictions from each model, each box is 4 numbers. 
        It has 3 dimensions (models_number, model_preds, 4)
        Order of boxes: x1, y1, x2, y2. We expect float normalized coordinates [0; 1] 
        :param scores: list of scores for each model 
        :param labels: list of labels for each model
        :param method: 1 - linear soft-NMS, 2 - gaussian soft-NMS, 3 - standard NMS
        :param iou_thr: IoU value for boxes to be a match 
        :param sigma: Sigma value for SoftNMS
        :param thresh: threshold for boxes to keep (important for SoftNMS)
        :param weights: list of weights for each model. Default: None, which means weight == 1 for each model
    
        :return: boxes: boxes coordinates (Order of boxes: x1, y1, x2, y2). 
        :return: scores: confidence scores
        :return: labels: boxes labels
        """
    
        # If weights are specified
        if weights is not None:
            if len(boxes) != len(weights):
                print('Incorrect number of weights: {}. Must be: {}. Skip it'.format(len(weights), len(boxes)))
            else:
                weights = np.array(weights)
                for i in range(len(weights)):
                    scores[i] = (np.array(scores[i]) * weights[i]) / weights.sum()
    
        # We concatenate everything
        boxes = np.concatenate(boxes)
        scores = np.concatenate(scores)
        labels = np.concatenate(labels)
        if masks is not None:
            masks = np.concatenate(masks)
    
        # Fix coordinates and removed zero area boxes
        boxes, scores, labels, masks = prepare_boxes(boxes, scores, labels, masks)
    
        # Run NMS independently for each label
        unique_labels = np.unique(labels)
        final_boxes = []
        final_scores = []
        final_labels = []
        if masks is not None:
            final_masks = []
    
        for l in unique_labels:
            condition = (labels == l)
            boxes_by_label = boxes[condition]
            scores_by_label = scores[condition]
            labels_by_label = np.array([l] * len(boxes_by_label))
            if masks is not None:
                masks_by_label = masks[condition]
    
            if method != 3:
                keep = cpu_soft_nms_float(boxes_by_label.copy(), scores_by_label.copy(), Nt=iou_thr, sigma=sigma, thresh=thresh, method=method)
            else:
                # Use faster function
                keep = nms_float_fast(boxes_by_label, scores_by_label, thresh=iou_thr)
    
            final_boxes.append(boxes_by_label[keep])
            final_scores.append(scores_by_label[keep])
            final_labels.append(labels_by_label[keep])
            if masks is not None:
                final_masks.append(masks_by_label[keep])
        final_boxes = np.concatenate(final_boxes)
        final_scores = np.concatenate(final_scores)
        final_labels = np.concatenate(final_labels)
        final_masks = np.concatenate(final_masks)
    
        return final_boxes, final_scores, final_labels, final_masks
    
    def nms(boxes, scores, labels, masks=None, iou_thr=0.5, weights=None):
        """
        Short call for standard NMS 
        
        :param boxes: 
        :param scores: 
        :param labels: 
        :param iou_thr: 
        :param weights: 
        :return: 
        """
        return nms_method(boxes, scores, labels, masks, method=3, iou_thr=iou_thr, weights=weights)
    
    
    def soft_nms(boxes, scores, labels, masks=None, method=2, iou_thr=0.5, sigma=0.5, thresh=0.001, weights=None):
        """
        Short call for Soft-NMS
         
        :param boxes: 
        :param scores: 
        :param labels: 
        :param method: 
        :param iou_thr: 
        :param sigma: 
        :param thresh: 
        :param weights: 
        :return: 
        """
        return nms_method(boxes, scores, labels, masks, method=method, iou_thr=iou_thr, sigma=sigma, thresh=thresh, weights=weights)
    

    I know it looks like error prone with this fast work around but do you think this feature deserves a pull request? @ZFTurbo

    opened by gunesevitan 1
Releases(v1.0.8)
An AutoML Library made with Optuna and PyTorch Lightning

An AutoML Library made with Optuna and PyTorch Lightning Installation Recommended pip install -U gradsflow From source pip install git+https://github.

GradsFlow 294 Dec 17, 2022
Wordplay, an artificial Intelligence based crossword puzzle solver.

Wordplay, AI based crossword puzzle solver A crossword is a word puzzle that usually takes the form of a square or a rectangular grid of white- and bl

Vaibhaw 4 Nov 16, 2022
Space-event-trace - Tracing service for spaceteam events

space-event-trace Tracing service for TU Wien Spaceteam events. This service is

TU Wien Space Team 2 Jan 04, 2022
Pytorch implementation of “Recursive Non-Autoregressive Graph-to-Graph Transformer for Dependency Parsing with Iterative Refinement”

Graph-to-Graph Transformers Self-attention models, such as Transformer, have been hugely successful in a wide range of natural language processing (NL

Idiap Research Institute 40 Aug 14, 2022
Self-Supervised Contrastive Learning of Music Spectrograms

Self-Supervised Music Analysis Self-Supervised Contrastive Learning of Music Spectrograms Dataset Songs on the Billboard Year End Hot 100 were collect

27 Dec 10, 2022
Project Aquarium is a SUSE-sponsored open source project aiming at becoming an easy to use, rock solid storage appliance based on Ceph.

Project Aquarium Project Aquarium is a SUSE-sponsored open source project aiming at becoming an easy to use, rock solid storage appliance based on Cep

Aquarist Labs 73 Jul 21, 2022
Semantically Contrastive Learning for Low-light Image Enhancement

Semantically Contrastive Learning for Low-light Image Enhancement Here, we propose an effective semantically contrastive learning paradigm for Low-lig

48 Dec 16, 2022
[ECCV 2020] XingGAN for Person Image Generation

Contents XingGAN or CrossingGAN Installation Dataset Preparation Generating Images Using Pretrained Model Train and Test New Models Evaluation Acknowl

Hao Tang 218 Oct 29, 2022
FrankMocap: A Strong and Easy-to-use Single View 3D Hand+Body Pose Estimator

FrankMocap pursues an easy-to-use single view 3D motion capture system developed by Facebook AI Research (FAIR). FrankMocap provides state-of-the-art 3D pose estimation outputs for body, hand, and bo

Facebook Research 1.9k Jan 07, 2023
PPLNN is a Primitive Library for Neural Network is a high-performance deep-learning inference engine for efficient AI inferencing

PPLNN is a Primitive Library for Neural Network is a high-performance deep-learning inference engine for efficient AI inferencing

943 Jan 07, 2023
Deep Semisupervised Multiview Learning With Increasing Views (IEEE TCYB 2021, PyTorch Code)

Deep Semisupervised Multiview Learning With Increasing Views (ISVN, IEEE TCYB) Peng Hu, Xi Peng, Hongyuan Zhu, Liangli Zhen, Jie Lin, Huaibai Yan, Dez

3 Nov 19, 2022
A very simple tool to rewrite parameters such as attributes and constants for OPs in ONNX models. Simple Attribute and Constant Modifier for ONNX.

sam4onnx A very simple tool to rewrite parameters such as attributes and constants for OPs in ONNX models. Simple Attribute and Constant Modifier for

Katsuya Hyodo 6 May 15, 2022
Official Pytorch implementation of "Unbiased Classification Through Bias-Contrastive and Bias-Balanced Learning (NeurIPS 2021)

Unbiased Classification Through Bias-Contrastive and Bias-Balanced Learning (NeurIPS 2021) Official Pytorch implementation of Unbiased Classification

Youngkyu 17 Jan 01, 2023
Fast and accurate optimisation for registration with little learningconvexadam

convexAdam Learn2Reg 2021 Submission Fast and accurate optimisation for registration with little learning Excellent results on Learn2Reg 2021 challeng

17 Dec 06, 2022
Code for testing convergence rates of Lipschitz learning on graphs

📈 LipschitzLearningRates The code in this repository reproduces the experimental results on convergence rates for k-nearest neighbor graph infinity L

2 Dec 20, 2021
[CVPR 2022] Official code for the paper: "A Stitch in Time Saves Nine: A Train-Time Regularizing Loss for Improved Neural Network Calibration"

MDCA Calibration This is the official PyTorch implementation for the paper: "A Stitch in Time Saves Nine: A Train-Time Regularizing Loss for Improved

MDCA Calibration 21 Dec 22, 2022
Pytorch Implementation for CVPR2018 Paper: Learning to Compare: Relation Network for Few-Shot Learning

LearningToCompare Pytorch Implementation for Paper: Learning to Compare: Relation Network for Few-Shot Learning Howto download mini-imagenet and make

Jackie Loong 246 Dec 19, 2022
Auto White-Balance Correction for Mixed-Illuminant Scenes

Auto White-Balance Correction for Mixed-Illuminant Scenes Mahmoud Afifi, Marcus A. Brubaker, and Michael S. Brown York University Video Reference code

Mahmoud Afifi 47 Nov 26, 2022
In the case of your data having only 1 channel while want to use timm models

timm_custom Description In the case of your data having only 1 channel while want to use timm models (with or without pretrained weights), run the fol

2 Nov 26, 2021
Unified Pre-training for Self-Supervised Learning and Supervised Learning for ASR

UniSpeech The family of UniSpeech: UniSpeech (ICML 2021): Unified Pre-training for Self-Supervised Learning and Supervised Learning for ASR UniSpeech-

Microsoft 282 Jan 09, 2023