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

Update ultralytics models #592

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Nov 17, 2024
Merged

Update ultralytics models #592

merged 11 commits into from
Nov 17, 2024

Conversation

dreadatour
Copy link
Contributor

@dreadatour dreadatour commented Nov 13, 2024

Update Ultralytics YOLO models to be used in SaaS.

This adds Segments model and common YoloBBox, YoloBBoxes, YoloPose, YoloPoses, YoloSegment and YoloSegments models to be used to parse ultralytics results.

@dreadatour dreadatour self-assigned this Nov 13, 2024
@dreadatour dreadatour marked this pull request as draft November 13, 2024 15:57
Copy link

cloudflare-workers-and-pages bot commented Nov 13, 2024

Deploying datachain-documentation with  Cloudflare Pages  Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit: 530c14c
Status: ✅  Deploy successful!
Preview URL: https://ce7ae4cd.datachain-documentation.pages.dev
Branch Preview URL: https://models-ultralytics.datachain-documentation.pages.dev

View logs

@dreadatour dreadatour force-pushed the models-ultralytics branch 2 times, most recently from 434d4ce to 884c086 Compare November 15, 2024 15:06
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 15, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 69.96337% with 82 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 87.41%. Comparing base (059241a) to head (530c14c).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/datachain/lib/models/ultralytics/bbox.py 50.00% 42 Missing ⚠️
src/datachain/lib/models/ultralytics/segment.py 54.00% 23 Missing ⚠️
src/datachain/lib/models/ultralytics/pose.py 69.64% 17 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #592      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   87.88%   87.41%   -0.48%     
==========================================
  Files         100      106       +6     
  Lines       10011    10279     +268     
  Branches     1357     1377      +20     
==========================================
+ Hits         8798     8985     +187     
- Misses        871      953      +82     
+ Partials      342      341       -1     
Flag Coverage Δ
datachain 87.35% <69.96%> (-0.48%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@dreadatour dreadatour requested a review from a team November 15, 2024 15:43
@dreadatour dreadatour marked this pull request as ready for review November 15, 2024 15:44
Copy link
Member

@0x2b3bfa0 0x2b3bfa0 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For consistency with ab74442

@dreadatour
Copy link
Contributor Author

dreadatour commented Nov 17, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 69.96337% with 82 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 87.13%. Comparing base (059241a) to head (530c14c).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/datachain/lib/models/ultralytics/bbox.py 50.00% 42 Missing ⚠️
src/datachain/lib/models/ultralytics/segment.py 54.00% 23 Missing ⚠️
src/datachain/lib/models/ultralytics/pose.py 69.64% 17 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

To be honest I am not sure if it worth it now to implement tests for these files. It will require ultralytics to be installed and models to be downloaded and will affect test execution time.

I think better idea is to add these models usage into examples?

Also we may want to move these models into datachain.tools may be?

@dreadatour dreadatour merged commit b62d091 into main Nov 17, 2024
37 of 38 checks passed
@dreadatour dreadatour deleted the models-ultralytics branch November 17, 2024 03:21
name (list[str]): The names of the segments.
confidence (list[float]): The confidences of the segments.
box (list[BBox]): The bounding boxes of the segments.
segments (list[Segments]): The segments of the segments.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this hurts my brain

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What are the options?

shcheklein added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 19, 2024
shcheklein added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 19, 2024
@dreadatour dreadatour restored the models-ultralytics branch November 20, 2024 18:21
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants