Closed YoungXIAO13 closed 4 years ago
Hi, @YoungXIAO13
We just evaluate our method on datasplits provided by FSRW (also in TFA's section 4.1) and our natural sampling strategy (you can find them at tools/fewshot_exp/datasets/voc_sample_series.py
).
The Generalized few-shot object detection benchmark is a new contribution of TFA which shows the large sample variance that we ignored before. However, their paper was available at arxiv after our paper submission. So we did not add this evaluation into our work.
If you are curious about how well our method works on this generalized benchamrk, please evaluate it by yourself since we don't have resources for this temporarily. Thanks & looking forward to your reply.
Thanks for your reply. Another question I'm wondering is that do you exclude all the training samples containing novel classes in the base training stage, or do you treat novel objects as background as mentioned here ?
I exclude images containing novel samples in the base training stage (tools/fewshot_exp/datasets/voc_create_base.py
).
Hi,
Thx for sharing the code. I have just one question about the evaluation protocol of few-shot object detection.
As proposed in the recent paper TFA, where the performances are computed as an average of multiple experimental runs with random support images, have you also done this in your work and report the averaged results somewhere ?