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

Faster R-CNN training in TensorFlow < 1.4 ? #578

Closed
csnemes2 opened this issue Jan 5, 2018 · 4 comments
Closed

Faster R-CNN training in TensorFlow < 1.4 ? #578

csnemes2 opened this issue Jan 5, 2018 · 4 comments
Labels

Comments

@csnemes2
Copy link

csnemes2 commented Jan 5, 2018

Can I retrain Faster R-CNN with TF 1.3?
Evaluation worked perfectly with TF1.3, and I can confirm your published results.

BUT, when I train I run into an assert at https://github.com/ppwwyyxx/tensorpack/blob/master/tensorpack/models/batch_norm.py

if use_local_stat:
blabla
else:
if ctx.is_training:
assert get_tf_version_number() >= 1.4,
"Fine tuning a BatchNorm model with fixed statistics is only "
"supported after tensorflow/tensorflow#12580 "

Without pain, Is there any chance to set use_local_stat to True?
According to my quick check

@ppwwyyxx
Copy link
Collaborator

ppwwyyxx commented Jan 5, 2018

You cannot. That's why it requires TF>=1.4

@csnemes2
Copy link
Author

csnemes2 commented Jan 5, 2018

Thanks for the quick and clear answer, I am already downloading the 1.4 :)
Any chance to update the readme?
I have just checked it and no hints, just something tf>=1.2 which is true but not very tight :)

@machanic
Copy link

machanic commented Jan 5, 2018

tf 1.5 has already released , which fully support dynamic graph( like in PyTorch), which will ease the burden of debug breakpoint tf. Will tensorpack supply a switch argument to open dynamic graph let us to easy debug?

@ppwwyyxx
Copy link
Collaborator

ppwwyyxx commented Jan 5, 2018

Any chance to update the readme?

The readme is correct. Tensorpack depends on TF>=1.2; FasterRCNN depends on TF>=1.4. Both are mentioned in the corresponding readme.

@sharpstill I'll look at that in the future at #463.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants