Skip to content
New issue

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

The relationship with FullCRF #10

Open
zy937085318 opened this issue Aug 28, 2018 · 2 comments
Open

The relationship with FullCRF #10

zy937085318 opened this issue Aug 28, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@zy937085318
Copy link

hi~ I'm digging in your work for weeks and it's really awesome! Now I wanna ask if I set the conv size as the input size, does it mean that the convCRF is equivalent to FullyCRF in this case?

@hsu-z2
Copy link

hsu-z2 commented Aug 28, 2018

My understanding is you need to change the kernel size in the message passing function. Change it from 7 (the value used in the current code) to your input size.

@MarvinTeichmann
Copy link
Owner

MarvinTeichmann commented Sep 25, 2018

Yes, if you use a large filter size you will get a model very similar to FullCRF. Note that there are some subtle differences. FullCRF uses the Permutohedral Lattice approximation, while a ConvCRF with large filter size is exact.

I have visualized the differences by plotting the impulse response for the filters on a simple 10x10 pixel image, where the center pixels are white with a black frame. The 10x10 filter has the same response as a simple (inefficient) exact filter I have implemented in numpy. The lattice filter however loses some detail. Below the results.

Input Image: 10 x 10 Response of a 5x5 filter Exact Response Response of Lattice (FullCRF)
input 5filter filter10 lattice

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants