Skip to content

Conversation

glenn-jocher
Copy link
Member

@glenn-jocher glenn-jocher commented Sep 15, 2022

Resolves #9400

Signed-off-by: Glenn Jocher [email protected]

πŸ› οΈ PR Summary

Made with ❀️ by Ultralytics Actions

🌟 Summary

Improved evaluation metric calculations in the validation script.

πŸ“Š Key Changes

  • Replaced mixed variable dt, p, r, f1, mp, mr, map50, map with separate variables for tp (true positives), fp (false positives), and various performance metrics.
  • Isolated the Profile() instances to a standalone variable dt for better code readability.

🎯 Purpose & Impact

  • πŸ’‘ Clarity: The separation of variables clarifies the purpose of each, making the code more readable and maintainable.
  • πŸ” Precision: By distinguishing true positives (tp) and false positives (fp), the script potentially allows for more accurate performance tracking.
  • πŸ“ˆ Performance Evaluation: The update could help both developers and users to better understand and evaluate the model's performance on validation data.
  • πŸ€– User Experience: Non-expert users may find the performance metrics easier to interpret, contributing to a more user-friendly interface for model evaluation.

Resolves #9400

Signed-off-by: Glenn Jocher <[email protected]>
@glenn-jocher glenn-jocher merged commit 58ad5ca into master Sep 15, 2022
@glenn-jocher glenn-jocher deleted the glenn-jocher-patch-1 branch September 15, 2022 22:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

One of the judgment criteria for line 267 in the val.py seems less rigorous

1 participant