We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Hello, thank you for your great work.
But I run the face parsing model on the CelebAMask-HQ test set (2824 images) and got the below performance.
The model I run is the farl/celebm/448, face_parsing.farl.celebm.main_ema_181500_jit.pt. F1 scores: {'background': 0.9343307778499743, 'skin': 0.9641438432481969, 'nose': 0.9377685027511485, 'eye_g': 0.8991579940116652, 'l_eye': 0.8797685119013225, 'r_eye': 0.8815088490017493, 'l_brow': 0.8546936399701022, 'r_brow': 0.8517906024905171, 'l_ear': 0.8826971414311515, 'r_ear': 0.8796045818209585, 'mouth': 0.9227481788076385, 'u_lip': 0.8879356316268103, 'l_lip': 0.9040920760745508, 'hair': 0.935249390735524, 'hat': 0.8693470068443545, 'ear_r': 0.697250254530866, 'neck_l': 0.3732396631852335, 'neck': 0.8658552106253891, 'cloth': 0.8273804800814614, 'fg_mean': 0.8507906421743688}
It seems the mean f is 85.07, which is not match with the 89.56 reported in the paper.
Moreover, the necklace performance is very low, 37.32, which is much smaller than the 69.72 in paper.
Can you help me to figure out the reason?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No branches or pull requests
Hello, thank you for your great work.
But I run the face parsing model on the CelebAMask-HQ test set (2824 images) and got the below performance.
The model I run is the farl/celebm/448, face_parsing.farl.celebm.main_ema_181500_jit.pt.
F1 scores: {'background': 0.9343307778499743, 'skin': 0.9641438432481969, 'nose': 0.9377685027511485, 'eye_g': 0.8991579940116652, 'l_eye': 0.8797685119013225, 'r_eye': 0.8815088490017493, 'l_brow': 0.8546936399701022, 'r_brow': 0.8517906024905171, 'l_ear': 0.8826971414311515, 'r_ear': 0.8796045818209585, 'mouth': 0.9227481788076385, 'u_lip': 0.8879356316268103, 'l_lip': 0.9040920760745508, 'hair': 0.935249390735524, 'hat': 0.8693470068443545, 'ear_r': 0.697250254530866, 'neck_l': 0.3732396631852335, 'neck': 0.8658552106253891, 'cloth': 0.8273804800814614, 'fg_mean': 0.8507906421743688}
It seems the mean f is 85.07, which is not match with the 89.56 reported in the paper.
Moreover, the necklace performance is very low, 37.32, which is much smaller than the 69.72 in paper.
Can you help me to figure out the reason?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: