i've a CRNN model for text recognition, it was published on Github, trained on english language,
Now i'm doing the same thing using this algorithm but for arabic.
My ctc function is:
def ctc_lambda_func(args):
y_pred, labels, input_length, label_length = args
# the 2 is critical here since the first couple outputs of the RNN
# tend to be garbage:
y_pred = y_pred[:, 2:, :]
return K.ctc_batch_cost(labels, y_pred, input_length, label_length)
My Model is:
def get_Model(training):
img_w = 128
img_h = 64
# Network parameters
conv_filters = 16
kernel_size = (3, 3)
pool_size = 2
time_dense_size = 32
rnn_size = 128
if K.image_data_format() == 'channels_first':
input_shape = (1, img_w, img_h)
else:
input_shape = (img_w, img_h, 1)
# Initialising the CNN
act = 'relu'
input_data = Input(name='the_input', shape=input_shape, dtype='float32')
inner = Conv2D(conv_filters, kernel_size, padding='same',
activation=act, kernel_initializer='he_normal',
name='conv1')(input_data)
inner = MaxPooling2D(pool_size=(pool_size, pool_size), name='max1')(inner)
inner = Conv2D(conv_filters, kernel_size, padding='same',
activation=act, kernel_initializer='he_normal',
name='conv2')(inner)
inner = MaxPooling2D(pool_size=(pool_size, pool_size), name='max2')(inner)
conv_to_rnn_dims = (img_w // (pool_size ** 2), (img_h // (pool_size ** 2)) * conv_filters)
inner = Reshape(target_shape=conv_to_rnn_dims, name='reshape')(inner)
# cuts down input size going into RNN:
inner = Dense(time_dense_size, activation=act, name='dense1')(inner)
# Two layers of bidirectional GRUs
# GRU seems to work as well, if not better than LSTM:
gru_1 = GRU(rnn_size, return_sequences=True, kernel_initializer='he_normal', name='gru1')(inner)
gru_1b = GRU(rnn_size, return_sequences=True, go_backwards=True, kernel_initializer='he_normal', name='gru1_b')(inner)
gru1_merged = add([gru_1, gru_1b])
gru_2 = GRU(rnn_size, return_sequences=True, kernel_initializer='he_normal', name='gru2')(gru1_merged)
gru_2b = GRU(rnn_size, return_sequences=True, go_backwards=True, kernel_initializer='he_normal', name='gru2_b')(gru1_merged)
# transforms RNN output to character activations:
inner = Dense(num_classes+1, kernel_initializer='he_normal',
name='dense2')(concatenate([gru_2, gru_2b]))
y_pred = Activation('softmax', name='softmax')(inner)
Model(inputs=input_data, outputs=y_pred).summary()
labels = Input(name='the_labels', shape=[30], dtype='float32')
input_length = Input(name='input_length', shape=[1], dtype='int64')
label_length = Input(name='label_length', shape=[1], dtype='int64')
# Keras doesn't currently support loss funcs with extra parameters
# so CTC loss is implemented in a lambda layer
loss_out = Lambda(ctc_lambda_func, output_shape=(1,), name='ctc')([y_pred, labels, input_length, label_length])
# clipnorm seems to speeds up convergence
# the loss calc occurs elsewhere, so use a dummy lambda func for the loss
if training:
return Model(inputs=[input_data, labels, input_length, label_length], outputs=loss_out)
return Model(inputs=[input_data], outputs=y_pred)
Then i compile it with SGD optimizer (Tried SGD,adam)
sgd = SGD(lr=0.0000002, decay=1e-6, momentum=0.9, nesterov=True, clipnorm=5)
model.compile(loss={'ctc': lambda y_true, y_pred: y_pred}, optimizer=sgd)
Then i fit the model with my training set (Images of words up to 30 characters) into (sequence of labels of 30
model.fit_generator(generator=tiger_train.next_batch(),
steps_per_epoch=int(tiger_train.n / batch_size),
epochs=30,
callbacks=[checkpoint],
validation_data=tiger_val.next_batch(),
validation_steps=int(tiger_val.n / val_batch_size))
Once it starts, it give me loss = inf, after many searches, i didn't find any similar problem.
So my questions is, how can i solve this, what can make a ctc_loss compute an infinite cost?
Thanks in advance
I found the problem, it was dimensions problem,
For R-CNN OCR using CTC layer, if you are detecting a sequence with length n, you should have an image with at least a width of (2*n-1). The more the better till you reach the best image/timesteps ratio to let the CTC layer able to recognize the letter correctly. If image with is less than (2*n-1), it will give a nan loss.
This error is happened when image text have two equal characters in the same sequence e.g happen --> pp. for so that you can remove data that has this characteristic.
Related
I aim to use attention in a stacked LSTM model, but I don't know how to add AdditiveAttention mechanism of Keras between encoder and decoder layers. Let say, we have an input layer, an encoder, and a decoder, and a dense classification layer, and we aim our decoder to pay attention on all the hidden states of the encoder (h = [h1, ..., hT]) in deriving its outputs. Is there any high-level coding using the Keras whereby I can do? For example,
input_layer = Input(shape=(T, f))
x = input_layer
x = LSTM(num_neurons1, return_sequences=True)(x)
# Adding attention here, but I don't know how?
x = LSTM(num_neurons2)(x)
output_layer = Dense(1, 'sigmoid')(x)
model = Model(input_layer, output_layer)
...
I think this is wrong to use: x = AdditiveAttention(x, x). Am I right?
Maybe it is helpful for your issue ?
This is a classification model with LSTM and attention for classification on
character-level:
first create a custom layer for attention :
class attention(Layer):
def init(self,**kwargs):
super(attention,self).init(**kwargs)
def build(self,input_shape):
self.W=self.add_weight(name='attention_weight', shape=(input_shape[-1],1),
initializer='random_normal', trainable=True)
self.b=self.add_weight(name='attention_bias', shape=(input_shape[1],1),
initializer='zeros', trainable=True)
super(attention, self).build(input_shape)
def call(self,x):
# Alignment scores. Pass them through tanh function
e = K.tanh(K.dot(x,self.W)+self.b)
# Remove dimension of size 1
e = K.squeeze(e, axis=-1)
# Compute the weights
alpha = K.softmax(e)
# Reshape to tensorFlow format
alpha = K.expand_dims(alpha, axis=-1)
# Compute the context vector
context = x * alpha
context = K.sum(context, axis=1)
return context
LEN_CHA = 64 # number of characters
LEN_Input = 110 # depend on the longest sentence, padded with zero
def LSTM_model_attention(Labels=3):
model = Sequential()
model.add(Embedding(LEN_CHA, EMBEDDING_DIM, input_length=LEN_INPUT))
model.add(SpatialDropout1D(0.7))
model.add(Bidirectional(LSTM(256, return_sequences=True)))
model.add(attention())
model.add(Dense(Labels, activation='softmax'))
model.compile(optimizer='adam', loss='categorical_crossentropy', metrics=['acc'])
return model
LSTM_attention = LSTM_model_attention()
LSTM_attention.summary()
I am trying to implement Bayesian CNN using Mc Dropout on Pytorch,
the main idea is that by applying dropout at test time and running over many forward passes , you get predictions from a variety of different models.
I’ve found an application of the Mc Dropout and I really did not get how they applied this method and how exactly they did choose the correct prediction from the list of predictions
here is the code
def mcdropout_test(model):
model.train()
test_loss = 0
correct = 0
T = 100
for data, target in test_loader:
if args.cuda:
data, target = data.cuda(), target.cuda()
data, target = Variable(data, volatile=True), Variable(target)
output_list = []
for i in xrange(T):
output_list.append(torch.unsqueeze(model(data), 0))
output_mean = torch.cat(output_list, 0).mean(0)
test_loss += F.nll_loss(F.log_softmax(output_mean), target, size_average=False).data[0] # sum up batch loss
pred = output_mean.data.max(1, keepdim=True)[1] # get the index of the max log-probability
correct += pred.eq(target.data.view_as(pred)).cpu().sum()
test_loss /= len(test_loader.dataset)
print('\nMC Dropout Test set: Average loss: {:.4f}, Accuracy: {}/{} ({:.2f}%)\n'.format(
test_loss, correct, len(test_loader.dataset),
100. * correct / len(test_loader.dataset)))
train()
mcdropout_test()
I have replaced
data, target = Variable(data, volatile=True), Variable(target)
by adding
with torch.no_grad(): at the beginning
And this is how I have defined my CNN
class Net(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(Net, self).__init__()
self.conv1 = nn.Conv2d(3, 192, 5, padding=2)
self.pool = nn.MaxPool2d(2, 2)
self.conv2 = nn.Conv2d(192, 192, 5, padding=2)
self.fc1 = nn.Linear(192 * 8 * 8, 1024)
self.fc2 = nn.Linear(1024, 256)
self.fc3 = nn.Linear(256, 10)
self.dropout = nn.Dropout(p=0.3)
nn.init.xavier_uniform_(self.conv1.weight)
nn.init.constant_(self.conv1.bias, 0.0)
nn.init.xavier_uniform_(self.conv2.weight)
nn.init.constant_(self.conv2.bias, 0.0)
nn.init.xavier_uniform_(self.fc1.weight)
nn.init.constant_(self.fc1.bias, 0.0)
nn.init.xavier_uniform_(self.fc2.weight)
nn.init.constant_(self.fc2.bias, 0.0)
nn.init.xavier_uniform_(self.fc3.weight)
nn.init.constant_(self.fc3.bias, 0.0)
def forward(self, x):
x = self.pool(F.relu(self.dropout(self.conv1(x)))) # recommended to add the relu
x = self.pool(F.relu(self.dropout(self.conv2(x)))) # recommended to add the relu
x = x.view(-1, 192 * 8 * 8)
x = F.relu(self.fc1(x))
x = F.relu(self.fc2(self.dropout(x)))
x = self.fc3(self.dropout(x)) # no activation function needed for the last layer
return x
Can anyone help me to get the right implementation of the Monte Carlo Dropout method on CNN?
Implementing MC Dropout in Pytorch is easy. All that is needed to be done is to set the dropout layers of your model to train mode. This allows for different dropout masks to be used during the different various forward passes. Below is an implementation of MC Dropout in Pytorch illustrating how multiple predictions from the various forward passes are stacked together and used for computing different uncertainty metrics.
import sys
import numpy as np
import torch
import torch.nn as nn
def enable_dropout(model):
""" Function to enable the dropout layers during test-time """
for m in model.modules():
if m.__class__.__name__.startswith('Dropout'):
m.train()
def get_monte_carlo_predictions(data_loader,
forward_passes,
model,
n_classes,
n_samples):
""" Function to get the monte-carlo samples and uncertainty estimates
through multiple forward passes
Parameters
----------
data_loader : object
data loader object from the data loader module
forward_passes : int
number of monte-carlo samples/forward passes
model : object
keras model
n_classes : int
number of classes in the dataset
n_samples : int
number of samples in the test set
"""
dropout_predictions = np.empty((0, n_samples, n_classes))
softmax = nn.Softmax(dim=1)
for i in range(forward_passes):
predictions = np.empty((0, n_classes))
model.eval()
enable_dropout(model)
for i, (image, label) in enumerate(data_loader):
image = image.to(torch.device('cuda'))
with torch.no_grad():
output = model(image)
output = softmax(output) # shape (n_samples, n_classes)
predictions = np.vstack((predictions, output.cpu().numpy()))
dropout_predictions = np.vstack((dropout_predictions,
predictions[np.newaxis, :, :]))
# dropout predictions - shape (forward_passes, n_samples, n_classes)
# Calculating mean across multiple MCD forward passes
mean = np.mean(dropout_predictions, axis=0) # shape (n_samples, n_classes)
# Calculating variance across multiple MCD forward passes
variance = np.var(dropout_predictions, axis=0) # shape (n_samples, n_classes)
epsilon = sys.float_info.min
# Calculating entropy across multiple MCD forward passes
entropy = -np.sum(mean*np.log(mean + epsilon), axis=-1) # shape (n_samples,)
# Calculating mutual information across multiple MCD forward passes
mutual_info = entropy - np.mean(np.sum(-dropout_predictions*np.log(dropout_predictions + epsilon),
axis=-1), axis=0) # shape (n_samples,)
Moving on to the implementation which is posted in the question above, multiple predictions from T different forward passes are obtained by first setting the model to train mode (model.train()). Note that this is not desirable because unwanted stochasticity will be introduced in the predictions if there are layers other than dropout such as batch-norm in the model. Hence the best way is to just set the dropout layers to train mode as shown in the snippet above.
I am trying to train a 1-D ConvNet for time series classification as shown in this paper (refer to FCN om Fig. 1b) https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.06455.pdf
The Keras implementation is giving me vastly superior performance. Could someone explain why is that the case?
The code for Pytorch is as follow:
class Net(torch.nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(Net, self).__init__()
self.conv1 = nn.Conv1d(x_train.shape[1], 128, 8)
self.bnorm1 = nn.BatchNorm1d(128)
self.conv2 = nn.Conv1d(128, 256, 5)
self.bnorm2 = nn.BatchNorm1d(256)
self.conv3 = nn.Conv1d(256, 128, 3)
self.bnorm3 = nn.BatchNorm1d(128)
self.dense = nn.Linear(128, nb_classes)
def forward(self, x):
c1=self.conv1(x)
b1 = F.relu(self.bnorm1(c1))
c2=self.conv2(b1)
b2 = F.relu(self.bnorm2(c2))
c3=self.conv3(b2)
b3 = F.relu(self.bnorm3(c3))
output = torch.mean(b3, 2)
dense1=self.dense(output)
return F.softmax(dense1)
model = Net()
criterion = nn.CrossEntropyLoss()
optimizer = torch.optim.SGD(model.parameters(), lr=0.5, momentum=0.99)
losses=[]
for t in range(1000):
y_pred_1= model(x_train.float())
loss_1 = criterion(y_pred_1, y_train.long())
print(t, loss_1.item())
optimizer.zero_grad()
loss_1.backward()
optimizer.step()
For comparison, I use the following code for Keras:
x = keras.layers.Input(x_train.shape[1:])
conv1 = keras.layers.Conv1D(128, 8, padding='valid')(x)
conv1 = keras.layers.BatchNormalization()(conv1)
conv1 = keras.layers.Activation('relu')(conv1)
conv2 = keras.layers.Conv1D(256, 5, padding='valid')(conv1)
conv2 = keras.layers.BatchNormalization()(conv2)
conv2 = keras.layers.Activation('relu')(conv2)
conv3 = keras.layers.Conv1D(128, 3, padding='valid')(conv2)
conv3 = keras.layers.BatchNormalization()(conv3)
conv3 = keras.layers.Activation('relu')(conv3)
full = keras.layers.GlobalAveragePooling1D()(conv3)
out = keras.layers.Dense(nb_classes, activation='softmax')(full)
model = keras.models.Model(inputs=x, outputs=out)
optimizer = keras.optimizers.SGD(lr=0.5, decay=0.0, momentum=0.99)
model.compile(loss='categorical_crossentropy', optimizer=optimizer)
hist = model.fit(x_train, Y_train, batch_size=x_train.shape[0], nb_epoch=2000)
The only difference I see between the two is the initialization but however, the results are just vastly different. For reference, I use the same preprocessing as follows for both the datasets, with a subtle difference in input shapes, for Pytorch (Batch_Size, Channels, Length) and for Keras: (Batch_Size, Length, Channels).
The reason of different results is due to different default parameters of layers and optimizer. For example in pytorch decay-rate of batch-norm is considered as 0.9, whereas in keras it is 0.99. Like that, there may be other variation in default parameters.
If you use same parameters and fixed random seed for initialization, there won't be much difference in the result for both library.
I have implemented a variational autoencoder with CNN layers in the encoder and decoder. The code is shown below. My training data (train_X) consists of 40'000 images with size 64 x 80 x 1 and my validation data (valid_X) consists of 4500 images of size 64 x 80 x 1.
I would like to adapt my network in the following two ways:
Instead of using 2D convolutions (Conv2D and Conv2DTranspose) I would like to use 3D convolutions to take time into account (as the third dimension). For that I would like to use slices of 10 images, i.e. I will have images of size 64 x 80 x 1 x 10. Can I just use Conv3D and Conv3DTranspose or are other changes necessary?
I would like to try out convolutional LSTMs (ConvLSTM2D) in the encoder and decoder instead of plain 2D convolutions. Again, the input size of the images would be 64 x 80 x 1 x 10 (i.e. time series of 10 images). How can I adapt my network to work with ConvLSTM2D?
import keras
from keras import backend as K
from keras.layers import (Dense, Input, Flatten)
from keras.layers import Lambda, Conv2D
from keras.models import Model
from keras.layers import Reshape, Conv2DTranspose
from keras.losses import mse
def sampling(args):
z_mean, z_log_var = args
batch = K.shape(z_mean)[0]
dim = K.int_shape(z_mean)[1]
epsilon = K.random_normal(shape=(batch, dim))
return z_mean + K.exp(0.5 * z_log_var) * epsilon
inner_dim = 16
latent_dim = 6
image_size = (64,78,1)
inputs = Input(shape=image_size, name='encoder_input')
x = inputs
x = Conv2D(32, 3, strides=2, activation='relu', padding='same')(x)
x = Conv2D(64, 3, strides=2, activation='relu', padding='same')(x)
# shape info needed to build decoder model
shape = K.int_shape(x)
# generate latent vector Q(z|X)
x = Flatten()(x)
x = Dense(inner_dim, activation='relu')(x)
z_mean = Dense(latent_dim, name='z_mean')(x)
z_log_var = Dense(latent_dim, name='z_log_var')(x)
z = Lambda(sampling, output_shape=(latent_dim,), name='z')([z_mean, z_log_var])
# instantiate encoder model
encoder = Model(inputs, [z_mean, z_log_var, z], name='encoder')
# build decoder model
latent_inputs = Input(shape=(latent_dim,), name='z_sampling')
x = Dense(inner_dim, activation='relu')(latent_inputs)
x = Dense(shape[1] * shape[2] * shape[3], activation='relu')(x)
x = Reshape((shape[1], shape[2], shape[3]))(x)
x = Conv2DTranspose(64, 3, strides=2, activation='relu', padding='same')(x)
x = Conv2DTranspose(32, 3, strides=2, activation='relu', padding='same')(x)
outputs = Conv2DTranspose(filters=1, kernel_size=3, activation='sigmoid', padding='same', name='decoder_output')(x)
# instantiate decoder model
decoder = Model(latent_inputs, outputs, name='decoder')
# instantiate VAE model
outputs = decoder(encoder(inputs)[2])
vae = Model(inputs, outputs, name='vae')
def vae_loss(x, x_decoded_mean):
reconstruction_loss = mse(K.flatten(x), K.flatten(x_decoded_mean))
reconstruction_loss *= image_size[0] * image_size[1]
kl_loss = 1 + z_log_var - K.square(z_mean) - K.exp(z_log_var)
kl_loss = K.sum(kl_loss, axis=-1)
kl_loss *= -0.5
vae_loss = K.mean(reconstruction_loss + kl_loss)
return vae_loss
optimizer = keras.optimizers.Adam(lr=0.001, beta_1=0.9, beta_2=0.999, epsilon=1e-08, decay=0.000)
vae.compile(loss=vae_loss, optimizer=optimizer)
vae.fit(train_X, train_X,
epochs=500,
batch_size=128,
verbose=1,
shuffle=True,
validation_data=(valid_X, valid_X))
Thank you very much for the help. I really appreciate it.
Have your input shape as (10, 64 , 80, 1) and just replace the layers.
The boring part is to organize the input data, if you're going to use sliding windows or just reshape from (images, 64,80,1) to (images//10, 10, 64,80,1).
Sliding windows (Overlapping) or not?
1 - Ok.... if you want your model to understand individual segments of 10 images you may overlap or not. Your choice. Performance may be better with overlapping, but not necessarily.
There isn't really an order in the images, as long as the 10 frames are in order.
This is supported by Conv3D and by LSTM with stateful=False.
2 - But if you want your model to understand the entire sequence, dividing the sequences only because of memory, only LSTM with stateful=True can support this.
(A Conv3D with kernel size = (frames, w, h) will work, but limited to frames, never understanding sequences longer than frames. It may still be capable of detecting the existence of punctual events, though, but not long sequence relationships)
In this case, for the LSTM you will need to:
set shuffle = False in training
use a fixed batch size of sequences
not overlap images
create a manual training loop where you do model.reset_states() every time you are giving "new sequences" for training AND predicting
The loop structure would be:
for epoch in range(epochs):
for group_of_sequences in range(groups):
model.reset_states()
sequences = getAGroupOfCompleteSequences() #shape (sequences, total_length, ....)
for batch in range(slide_divisions):
batch = sequences[:,10*batch : 10*(batch+1)]
model.train_on_batch(batch, ....)
Well my neural network is as follows :
# Leaks data input is a 2-D vector of window*size*341 features
# Reshape to match picture format [Height x Width x Channel]
# Tensor input become 4-D: [Batch Size, Height, Width, Channel]
x = tf.reshape(x, shape= [-1, 16, 341, 2])
# Convolution Layer with 32 filters and a kernel size of 5
conv1 = tf.layers.conv2d(x, 6, 2, activation=tf.nn.relu)
# Max Pooling (down-sampling) with strides of 2 and kernel size of 2
conv1 = tf.layers.max_pooling2d(conv1, 2, 2)
# Convolution Layer with 64 filters and a kernel size of 3
conv2 = tf.layers.conv2d(conv1, 8, 3, activation=tf.nn.relu)
# Max Pooling (down-sampling) with strides of 2 and kernel size of 2
conv2 = tf.layers.max_pooling2d(conv2, 2, 2)
# Flatten the data to a 1-D vector for the fully connected layer
fc1 = tf.contrib.layers.flatten(conv2)
# Fully connected layer (in tf contrib folder for now)
fc1 = tf.layers.dense(fc1, 1024)
# Apply Dropout (if is_training is False, dropout is not applied)
fc1 = tf.layers.dropout(fc1, rate=dropout, training=is_training)
# 1-layer LSTM with n_hidden units.
out = tf.layers.dense(fc1, n_classes)
it predicts a multi-label classification vector on len = 339, first i wanted to make sure that i'm fully able to overfit small sample of data to make sure that every thing work okey and well defined.
I trained my neural network on 1700 len data,to measure my model performance i added accuracy as follow :
logits_train = conv_net(features, num_classes, dropout, reuse=False,
is_training=True)
logits_test = conv_net(features, num_classes, dropout, reuse=True,
is_training=False)
# Predictions
pred_classes = tf.cast(tf.greater(logits_test,0.5), tf.float32)
pred_probas = tf.nn.sigmoid(logits_test)
# If prediction mode, early return
if mode == tf.estimator.ModeKeys.PREDICT:
return tf.estimator.EstimatorSpec(mode, predictions=pred_classes)
# Define loss and optimizer
#tf.one_hot(tf.cast(labels,dtype=tf.int32),depth=2)
loss_op = tf.reduce_mean(tf.nn.sigmoid_cross_entropy_with_logits(labels=tf.cast(labels,dtype=tf.float32),logits=logits_train))
optimizer = tf.train.AdamOptimizer(learning_rate=learning_rate)
train_op = optimizer.minimize(loss_op,global_step=tf.train.get_global_step())
# Evaluate the accuracy of the model
accuracy = tf.metrics.accuracy(labels=labels , predictions = pred_classes )
#correct_prediction = tf.equal(tf.round(tf.nn.sigmoid(logits_test)), tf.round(labels))
#accuracy1 = tf.metrics.mean(tf.cast(correct_prediction, tf.float32))
#acc_op = tf.metrics.mean(tf.nn.sigmoid_cross_entropy_with_logits(logits=pred_classes,labels=labels))
# TF Estimators requires to return a EstimatorSpec, that specify
# the different ops for training, evaluating, ...
estim_specs = tf.estimator.EstimatorSpec(
mode=mode,
predictions=pred_probas,
loss=loss_op,
train_op=train_op,
eval_metric_ops={'accuracy': accuracy})
return estim_specs
The problem is that with few epochs the performance seems to be very good
for i in range(1,50):
print('Epoch',(i+1))
input_fn = tf.estimator.inputs.numpy_input_fn(x= curr_data_batch,y=curr_target_batch[:,:339] ,batch_size=96, shuffle=False)
model.train(input_fn=input_fn)
if (i+1) % 10 :
# eval the model
eval_model = model.evaluate(input_fn=input_fn)
print('Loss ,',eval_model['loss'] )
print('accuracy ,',eval_model['accuracy'] )
Loss , 0.029562088
accuracy , 0.9958855
Epoch 3:
Loss , 0.028194984
accuracy , 0.99588597
Epoch 4:
Loss , 0.027557796
accuracy , 0.9958862
but when i try to predict same training data i got fully oposet metrics
loss = 0.65
accuracy = 0.33
I don't know where this issue come from did i miss defined something or no ?
Ty