search

longcw / faster_rcnn_pytorch

Faster RCNN with PyTorch
MIT License
1.7k stars 466 forks source link

Question about the reslute mAP. #17

Open ayumiymk opened 7 years ago

ayumiymk commented 7 years ago

Does anyone get the comparable mAP on VOC07 in the origin paper?

zhanghang1989 commented 7 years ago

The author reported here: https://github.com/longcw/faster_rcnn_pytorch#training-on-pascal-voc-2007

ayumiymk commented 7 years ago

But the author got a 0.661 mAP on VOC07 while the origin paper got a 0.699 mAP. The author said we may need to tune the loss function defined in faster_rcnn/faster_rcnn.py by ourself. So what I want to know is the config to get a mAP comparable to the origin paper.

acgtyrant commented 7 years ago

I rewrite the project, and calculate its mAP, only 0.356.

zchrissirhcz commented 6 years ago

I just git cloned this project and train on my 1080Ti machine. The finally mAP@100000iteration is 65.6%.

brisker commented 6 years ago

@zchrissirhcz @longcw so what does the author mean by "tune the loss by ourselves in faster_rcnn.py" to get 0.699 mAP?

zchrissirhcz commented 6 years ago

@brisker In my opinion, I appreciate longcw's re-implementation. However, I'd like to use implementations with equal or higher accuracy than the paper. I suggest try this implementation:https://github.com/ruotianluo/pytorch-faster-rcnn

brisker commented 6 years ago

@zchrissirhcz https://github.com/ruotianluo/pytorch-faster-rcnn this implementation seems to be more consistent with rbg's original caffe version implementation. But I like longcw's implementation more. But still, I have no idea where to modify the loss function, as longcw have indicated. Do you know?