Planet Classification Challenge

(kumar kaushik) #146

Hi everyone,

I am having a small problem interms of predicting on the test data.

  1. Firstly I downloaded the primary test jpeg dataset and the additional test jpeg dataset.
  2. I moved the files from the additional test data folder to the primary test folder.

Now when i run the model and try to implement TTF(isTest = True), It is raising an exception telling me img-20xx is not found. I dont understand what is happening.

Can someone please explain how how we are supposed to prep the test data?

(Cam` Cairns) #147

I’m getting the same error … running on fastai AMI, latest pull of fastai repo

ValueError: Expected array-like (array or non-string sequence), got
1 0 0 … 0 0 1
0 0 0 … 0 0 0
1 0 0 … 0 0 0
… ⋱ …
1 0 0 … 0 0 1
0 0 0 … 0 0 0
0 0 0 … 0 0 1
[torch.FloatTensor of size 64x17]

The problem appears to be in the f2 metric. I tweaked the function in slightly to convert the torch.Tensor object to numpy arrays

def f2(preds, targs, start=0.17, end=0.24, step=0.01):
    with warnings.catch_warnings():
        return max([fbeta_score(targs.numpy(), (preds.numpy()>th), 2, average='samples')
                    for th in np.arange(start,end,step)])

and that seemed to fix it (ie. output learning rate-loss plot looks identical to the notebook in the video lecture).

(Surya Mohan) #148

@Cam. I truly appreciate your response. You are a saviour.

(Surya Mohan) #149

When I used @Cam’s approach, it asked me to switch to CPU from GPU.

(Cam` Cairns) #150

Ha yeah, I had run into a separate issue where Torch wasn’t accessing my GPU properly (that’s why our errors are slightly different [torch.FloatTensor of size 64x17] vs [torch.cuda.FloatTensor of size 64x17 (GPU 0)]).

If you are operating with GPU you first need to switch the tensor to cpu before converting to a np array. This seems to work ok

def f2(preds, targs, start=0.17, end=0.24, step=0.01):
    with warnings.catch_warnings():
        return max([fbeta_score(targs.cpu().numpy(), (preds.cpu().numpy()>th), 2, average='samples')
                    for th in np.arange(start,end,step)])

(Surya Mohan) #151

Thanks @Cam Somehow the original code started working again now. I am not entirely sure what happened over the last 2 weeks.

(YIYU SHI) #152

Hi Kevin,

Thanks for your sharing.

May I ask how long it took you to run all the models?

My 256 size model ran over one hour and the TTA was running until the kernel was dead.

I am not sure if I am doing it right.

(Nithiroj Tripatarasit) #153

learn.lr_find() failing with following error in lesson2

(Asir Saeed) #154

@nithiroj I’ve had the same issue. I went into the ~/fastai/ line 43 and changed the y to call y.float() and same for line 54 to get it to work but not sure if that’s the right fix though. BinaryCrossEntrpopy expects a float tensor target and not a long tensor which is causing this error. But since this is a classification task it would make sense that our target is a one-hot encoded vector represented as a long tensor.

Hi every one,

I’ve found really instructive the Planet exercise in lesson 2. So I decided to focus on this dataset, while tackling a different (I believe relevant) problem: 

I think the F2 score proposed disregards how good are the models at classifying the minority labels, although these are most important to understand impacts on Amazonia (mining, logging, urbanization, roads, etc.). 

The imbalance between classes is huge (the “clear” and “primary” labels appear more than 25000 times, whereas labels such “conventional_mine” only a hundred times or less). I think this imbalance cannot be fixed by oversampling the minority classes (as this will also create duplicates of the dominant ones). 

So as a starting point, I focused only on images with “clear” weather and moreover, considered the forest as background, i.e. only selecting images where “primary” coexists with the rest of the labels (such that we do not need to care about "primary" anymore).        

I ended up with a very small set of 2864 images. Still imbalanced, but at least following a linear distribution of classes (as opposed to exponential, see 1st Figure in Kernel


For this small dataset, I followed the steps (leading to F2-scores above .9 in the original problem):

1) Start with small image sizes: sz=64.

2) Find learning rate for and fit (2 epochs, cycle_len=1, cycle_mult=2), leading to F2-score=0.7 (validation).

3) Enabling data augmentation and fitting (3 epochs, cycle_len=1, cycle_mult=2), F2=0.725 
4) Unfreezing and training last layers ([lr/9,lr/3,lr], 3 epochs, cycle_len=1, cycle_mult=2), F2=0.728

5) Applying steps 2)- 4), but now using larger sizes, sz=128. I Achieved only F2=0.765. Although it kept improving, at this stage I did not push further for more epochs, as it had already started to overfit.

What would be the best way to tackle this kind of imbalance problem in multi-label classification? and how to get better results in this particular dataset?

(Shivan) #156

How can I print some of the correctly classified images along with the labels that were associated with the same ?

(YIYU SHI) #157

Hi everyone,
This competition uses F-2 score which based on precision and recall as the metric. I am wondering how precision and recall are calculated in this multi-label problem.

Does it calculate precision/recall for each label and take the average? If so, the result may be biased since the labels are unbalance.

Really appreciate if someone can help me out here!!!

(paco) #158

I am unable to extract tiff files. I get this error:

I’ve been doing some research and it seems “E_FAIL” error means “lack of disk space”, however I recently upgraded my machine to 100GB.

In case someone can help me, this is what I get when I run “df -h”

(Charm) #159

If the network contains a fully connected layer. Now suppose that the previously input images are all the same size, and the dimensions obtained after convolution are all the same, for example, a×b, followed by a 1×c fully connected layer, then you are now convolving. The size of the weight matrix between the output and the fully connected layer is (a × b) × c. But now if you enter an image larger than the original input, you have to have the convolution output be a’ × b ‘If it is connected to the full connected layer, the size of the weight matrix is (a’ × b’) × c, obviously not the same as the original weight matrix, so it can not be used and trained.
Why does set_data not change the network architecture, how does it train?

(Peter) #160

Does anybody have scripts to convert the predictions into kaggle submittable csv? I did some sorting and copying but it takes too long to convert the whole 40k test predictions.

(Michael) #161

Great post, thank you! :smiley:

(Michael) #162

Have a look at this post: Planet Classification Challenge

(Abhishek Mishra) #163

Hi folks,
I submitted in Planet classification challenge after going through part-1 notebooks.
I have couple of queries here.

  1. My public score evaluated to 0.90770 despite achieving 0.9333 f2 score on validation set(10% of train-jpg).

  2. I observed average training speed 342sec/it in last phase of training(sz=256 and unfreezing all layers),this speeds seems to slow for paperspace instance.

You can refer below screenshot for reference.

(Val Alexiev) #164

I have a quick question about learn.tta(is_test=True): In the code for this challenge it ends up returning a 3d array of size (5, 61191, 17). I understand the 61191 and 17, but I’m not sure what to make of the first dimension. Why do we get 5 of them? I would have expected only 2 dimensions and, in fact, all of the code samples in this thread take the first member of that array and ignore the rest of them.

(Navin Kumar) #165

Because TTA by default returns predictions on 4 random data augmentated images + 1 original image. We need to do an average over it to get the prediction for the original image like:

multi_preds, y = learn.TTA()
preds = np.mean(multi_preds, axis=0)

Not only for learn.TTA(is_test=True), it should also return the similar dimensions if it were called on the validation set like learn.TTA() . It too needs to be averaged in the next line to get the actual probabilities.
Note: In the planet competition, the model has softmax as its last activation layer. Hence it directly returns the actual probabilities.