Conversation
| shellingham = "^1.4.0" | ||
| scikit-learn = ">=0.24.0" | ||
| Shapely = ">=1.7.1" | ||
| Shapely = "^1.8.1" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gatli didn't we run into problems with Shapely at some point?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yup, we can't use it. It doesn't have wide enough binary support.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So what should we do about this? @Anirudh-Scale how much do we rely in the shapely dependency? Any chance we can get around this? If not, @gatli how can we still make this work?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pfmark I can implement a function to calculate the area intersection without Shapely, it's just going to be significantly slower. If that's a trade-off we're ok with, I can do that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's already a function for polygon area intersection in the directory under geometry.py. I'd suggest using that since it looks like you're using shapely only for polygon intersection area.
Edit: it looks like the native polygon was used originally before changing to shapely? The native polygon intersection function is quite slow since it's written in Python, but there's a speed up for convex polygons
pfmark
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
few smaller comments. In addition, do we have a way of easily testing the correctness of the metrics in a test unit test? I think that would be great!
|
|
||
| def __init__( | ||
| self, | ||
| enforce_label_match: bool = False, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This argument (and maybe confidence_threshold?) should be required in the constructor, and if we want to set defaults then set them in the child classes.
Added 3D IOU, BEV 2D IOU, and recall, precision metrics. Tested end-to-end with celery in
modelsrepo (see associated PR there).