I trained a maskrcnn-model with matterport with one class to detect. It worked.
Now I want to predict some unseen images. I know that the object is present on each image and that it appears only once per image. How do I use my model to do so?
An possibility that came to my mind was:
num_results = 0
while num_results = 0:
model = mrcnn.model.MaskRCNN(mode='inference', config=pred_config)
model.load_weights('weight/path')
results = model.detect([img], verbose=1)
num_results = compute_num_of(results)
# lower DETECTION_MIN_CONFIDENCE from pred_config
But I think this is very time consuming because I load that model and its weights at every step. What would be best practice here?
Thanks
Related
I was implementing a genetic algorithm with tf keras, where i manualy modify the weight, make the gene cross over, all that. Ive found that after a few docen generations, the predictions of all the network are essentialy identical, and after a few more generations the predictions are exactly the same. trying to google the problem i found this page
that mentions the problem in a conceptual level but i cant understand how this would happen if im manualy creating genetic diverity every generation.
def model_mutate(weights,var):
for i in range(len(weights)):
for j in range(len(weights[i])):
if( random.uniform(0,1) < 0.2): #learing rate of 15%
change = np.random.uniform(-var,var,weights[i][j].shape)
weights[i][j] += change
return weights
def crossover_brains(parent1, parent2):
global brains
weight1 = parent1.get_weights()
weight2 = parent2.get_weights()
new_weight1 = weight1
new_weight2 = weight2
gene = random.randint(0,len(new_weight1)-1) #we change a random weight
#or set of weights
new_weight1[gene] = weight2[gene]
new_weight2[gene] = weight1[gene]
q=np.asarray([new_weight1,new_weight2],dtype=object)
return q
def evolve(best_fit1,best_fit2):
global generation
global best_brain
global best_brain2
mutations=[]
for i in range(total_brains//2):
cross_weights=model_crossover(best_fit1,best_fit2)
mutation1=model_mutate(cross_weights[0],0.5)
mutation2=model_mutate(cross_weights[1],0.5)
mutations.append(mutation1)
mutations.append(mutation2)
for i in range(total_brains):
brains[i].set_weights(mutations[i])
generation+=1
def find_best_fit():
fitness=np.loadtxt("fitness.txt")
print(f"fitness average {np.mean(fitness)} in generation {generation}")
print(f"fitness max is {np.max(fitness)} in generation {generation} ")
fitness_t.append(np.mean(fitness))
maxfit1=np.max(fitness)
best_fit1=np.where(fitness==maxfit1)[0]
fitness[best_fit1]=0
maxfit2=np.max(fitness)
best_fit2=np.where(fitness==maxfit2)[0]
if len(best_fit1)>1: #this is a band_aid for when several indiviuals are the same
# this would lead to best_fit(1,2) being an array of indeces
best_fit1=best_fit1[0]
if len(best_fit2)>1:
best_fit2=best_fit2[0]
return int(best_fit1),int(best_fit2)
bf1,bf2=find_best_fit()
evolve(bf1,bf2)
This is the code im using to set the modified weights to the existing keras models (mostly not mine, i dont understand it enough to have created this myself)
if keras is working how i think its working, then i dont see how this would converge to anything that does not maximize fitness, further more, it seems to be decreasing over time.
Apologies in advance.
I am attempting to recreate this CNN (from the Keras Code Examples), with another dataset.
https://keras.io/examples/vision/image_classification_from_scratch/
The dataset I am using is one for retinal scans, and classifies images on a scale from 0-4. So, it's a multi-label image classification.
The Keras example used is binary classification (cats v dogs), though I would have hoped it wouldn't make much difference (maybe this is a big assumption on my part).
I skipped the 'image augmentation' part of the walkthrough. So, I have not created the
data_augmentation = keras.Sequential(
[
layers.RandomFlip("horizontal"),
layers.RandomRotation(0.1),
]
)
part. So, instead of:
def make_model(input_shape, num_classes):
inputs = keras.Input(shape=input_shape)
# Image augmentation block
x = data_augmentation(inputs)
# Entry block
x = layers.Rescaling(1.0 / 255)(x)
.......
at the beginning of the model, I have:
def make_model(input_shape, num_classes):
inputs = keras.Input(shape=input_shape)
# Image augmentation block
x = keras.Sequential(inputs)
# Entry block
x = layers.Rescaling(1.0 / 255)(x)
.......
However I keep getting different errors no matter how much I try to change things around, such as "TypeError: Keras symbolic inputs/outputs do not implement __len__.", or "ValueError: Exception encountered when calling layer "rescaling_3" (type Rescaling).".
What am I missing here?
I'm trying to implement something with pytorch.
I have 2 GPUs and I want to train 2 models as below:
model0 = Mymodel().to('cuda:0')
model1 = Mymodel().to('cuda:1')
opt0 = torch.optim.Adam(model0.parameters(), lr=0.01)
opt1 = torch.optim.Adam(model0.parameters(), lr=0.01)
# 1.Forward data into model0 on GPU0
out = model0(x.to('cuda:0'))
# 2.Calculate the loss on model0, update model0's parameters
model0.loss.backward()
opt0.step()
opt0.zero_grad()
# 3.Use model0's output as input of model1 on GPU1
out = model1(out.to('cuda:1'))
# 4.Calculate the loss on model1, update model1's parameters
model1.loss.backward()
opt1.step()
opt1.zero_grad()
I want to train them simultaneously to speed up the whole procedure, but I think the code now will wait step 2(or 4) finished and finally do step 3(or 1). How can I implement my idea? Or which technique is I need(e.g. model parel, thread, multiprocessing...)?
I've consider some article like this, but I think there is some worng with the result, and I think it actually doesn't train models simultaneously.
You have a strong dependency between the 2 models, the 2nd one always needs the output from the previous one, so that part of the code will always be sequential.
I think you might need some sort of multiprocessing (take a look at torch.multiprocessing) or some kind of queue, where you can store the output from the first model.
We have been trying for a while to get this to work. This is probably the easiest example to create and so now we need help. We've been changing the number of epochs in the fit function and that's giving us different results, but never anything good, and when we increase them too much they will always converge on 0.5.
#%%
inputValues = numpy.array([[0,0],[0,1],[1,0],[1,1]])
inputResults = numpy.array([[0],[1],[1],[0]])
print(inputValues)
print(inputResults)
#%%
model = keras.Sequential([
keras.layers.Flatten(input_shape=(2,)),
keras.layers.Dense(units=2, activation=("relu")),
keras.layers.Dense(units=2, activation=("softmax"))
])
model.compile(loss = keras.losses.SparseCategoricalCrossentropy(), optimizer = tensorflow.optimizers.Adam(), metrics=['accuracy'])
model.fit(inputValues, inputResults, epochs=2500)
model.summary()
print(model.weights)
#%%
print(model.predict_proba(inputValues))
print("End of file.")
From my understanding of ANN's we should have 2 inputs in the first layer, specifically for the XOR example. And two outputs for the output (either a 0, or a 1). I assume that since it is not required to say what these outputs are (0 or 1), tensor flow is dealing with this automatically by comparing the results in the fit function? Lastly, we have tried with both a hidden layer (of 2) and without and still don't seem to get any better results.
Could someone let us know what we have done wrong?
Your problem is essentially a binary classification problem, because the output can be either 0 or 1. For this you don't need two ouput neurons; one will do, with a sigmoid function that will return either a 0 or a 1 as output (sigmoid generally works well for binary classification, because its characteristic S-shape will get you values either close to 0 or close to 1).
Another adjustment you need to make is to set the loss function to binary crossentropy; your choice, sparse categorical crossentropy, is suitable for classifications into more than 2 categories.
So the code that I tried is:
model = keras.Sequential([
keras.layers.Flatten(input_shape=(2,)),
keras.layers.Dense(units=4, activation=("sigmoid")),
keras.layers.Dense(units=1, activation=("sigmoid"))
])
model.compile(loss = keras.losses.BinaryCrossentropy(from_logits=False), optimizer = optimizers.Adam(), metrics=['accuracy'])
model.fit(inputValues, inputResults, epochs=2500)
With these settings I got training accuracy to 1.0000. It took a while to get there, and I suppose that could be sped up by playing around with the learning rate, but it should be enough to get the job done.
I've trained a model which i'm trying to apply onto new data. I'm totally new to fast.ai
i'm creating my databunch as below (ds being the data i want to score):
bs = 64
data_lm = (TextList.from_df(df, path, cols='comment_text')
.split_by_rand_pct(0.1)
.label_for_lm()
.databunch(bs=bs))
The problem being that I cannot ommit the .split_by_rand_pct(0.1), so I cannot score the whole data
I then go and load/apply the model as below
data_clas = load_data(path, 'data_clas.pkl', bs=bs)
learn = text_classifier_learner(data_clas, AWD_LSTM, drop_mult=0.5)
learn.load_encoder('fine_tuned_enc')
learn.load('third');
preds, target = learn.get_preds(DatasetType.Test, ordered=True)
labels = preds.numpy()
But the problem is i'm only scoring 0.1 pct of my data as the first piece of code when I create the databunch is not correct...i'm wanting to apply the saved/loaded model onto the overall DF.
Many thanks in advance
a colleague of mine actually provided me with the solution, I'm posting it here in case it's useful to anyone.
learn.data.add_test(df['Contact_Text'])
preds,y = learn.get_preds(ds_type=DatasetType.Test)
preds