About performance
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 47
- Forks
- 0
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Hello, I used the checkpoint from scorenet and OneDrive for ADHMR. Then I get the following results, which are much lower than the results reported in the paper.
3dpw dataset
MPVPE (Min): 62.61 mm
MPVPE (Select):79.96 mm
MPVPE (Zero Noise): 80.22 mm
MPVPE (Hypoes Mean):80.27 mmMPJPE (Min): 54.19 mm
MPJPE (Select): 68.87 mm
MPJPE (Zero Noise): 68.46 mm
MPJPE (Hypoes Mean): 68.59 mm
PA MPJPE (Min):31.97 mm
PA MPJPE (Select): 42.04 mm
PA MPJPE (Zero Noise): 41.93 mm
PA MPJPE (Hypoes Mean):41.99 mm
I'm wondering if I missed some steps?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reproducing the reported 3DPW evaluation with the scorenet and OneDrive checkpoints linked in the issue, then compare the MPVPE, MPJPE, and PA MPJPE results with the paper. The issue does not name evaluation files, tests, or a specific missing step; done would mean identifying and documenting the cause of the metric discrepancy.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- computer-vision, machine-learning
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100