You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
More of a question than an issue really. I was curious - if I'm understanding correctly the network will predict offsets for each anchor box, which in turn will describe a bounding box. This requires lots of conversions (cxcy to xy, encoding, decoding), so would it not be possible to simply train the network to output as [xmin, ymin, xmax, ymax] instead of [offset-x, offset-y, width, height]? If not, what are the issues with this?
In the same vein, is the encoding and decoding of the bounding box only necessary because we need to go from offsets -> bounding box described by offsets?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
More of a question than an issue really. I was curious - if I'm understanding correctly the network will predict offsets for each anchor box, which in turn will describe a bounding box. This requires lots of conversions (cxcy to xy, encoding, decoding), so would it not be possible to simply train the network to output as [xmin, ymin, xmax, ymax] instead of [offset-x, offset-y, width, height]? If not, what are the issues with this?
In the same vein, is the encoding and decoding of the bounding box only necessary because we need to go from offsets -> bounding box described by offsets?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: