-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 191
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
Trajectron++ evaluation metrics #11
Comments
Hi @mzahran001 , We do! Although the "minADE/minFDE" we report is in line with prior stochastic methods, namely the methods referenced in Table 1 (b) (where we sample N=20 times from the model and report the best-performing trajectory, i.e., the minimum error trajectory). As for why we didn't specifically report the "minADE/minFDE" metrics as defined in the nuScenes challenge for our nuScenes results, well, the nuScenes prediction challenge didn't exist when we were writing the paper! :P |
Thank you so much for your answer! I missed this part 😅 So if I want to calculate the "minADE/minFDE" for the current version of the paper taking in the consideration the nuScenes metrics, I will only use the same code used on the pedestrian datasets |
No worries! I think the more correct way to evaluate the method for the nuScenes prediction metrics would be to actually get the z values from the model, rank them according to their probability (from the model's CVAE likelihood p(z|x)), get the corresponding mean predictions from each z (it's a Gaussian at the output), and then take the min of those for the metrics. I'll post some code below that might help. |
@mzahran001 You'd want to call the model's prediction function like so:
where I've modified the You're going to want to change this line (https://github.com/StanfordASL/Trajectron-plus-plus/blob/master/trajectron/model/mgcvae.py#L1142) from
to
Then, you'll want to change https://github.com/StanfordASL/Trajectron-plus-plus/blob/master/trajectron/model/trajectron.py#L173 to handle the new outputs from the You'll want to make it look like
As for the evaluation metrics themselves, it might look like this (assuming preds is a
|
Hi @BorisIvanovic
Quick question, I am wondering why Trajectron++ did not report minADE as the case in MultiPath paper and in CoverNet? 🤔
I found that the only difference between the current implementation for the FDE function and the implementation used by these two papers is the ranking part.
In Argoverse and NuScence's challenges, they will use both minFDE and minADE
What do you think? Am I missing something here? 😅
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: