Closed nikmo33 closed 2 years ago
I have outlined a proposal in this PR - https://github.com/nerfstudio-project/nerfstudio/pull/886 . This is without the is_thing and loss_weight above, but can be added in pretty trivially if required
Hey @nikmo33, I just replied to your PR! We can discuss there. 🙂 I don't think we need the is_thing
and class_loss_weights
, but it would be nice to have an arbitrary number of things returned from the InputDataset
. Happy to work together on this.
Currently looking at the use of semantic segmentation - there seems to not really be a good use case to split the segmentation into thing / stuff classes. And Given the assumption that a 3d point can only belong to a single semantic class this should always be true? I was looking into integrating semantic nerf into my use case and find that the splitting into things / stuff seems necessary and adds added complexity, whereas I would like to just load the semantic labels as is and have a single head to perform semantic segmentation. It could add an additional head on top of thing/stuff, but this seems un-necessary and adds more complexity to the code. What do people think about changing the structure of the Semantics class to the following -
This should be flexible enough to support the current use case and allows simplifying the model code quite a bit? Im happy to self-assign this to myself as well if there is some consensus on this design decision. Thanks!