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

Darknet cfg convolution weights dimensions #370

Closed
Legorock opened this issue Nov 12, 2019 · 1 comment
Closed

Darknet cfg convolution weights dimensions #370

Legorock opened this issue Nov 12, 2019 · 1 comment

Comments

@Legorock
Copy link

I noticed that when I use Darknet's .cfg files and visualize the network topology, I got 4D weights like 3x3x3x(# of filters). I think you are using 'channels' information in the .cfg file for all weights channels. This seems to be wrong since the input feature map channel dimension is equal to the previous convolution # of filters. Also, see the actual page for detailed rundown of this topology.
Tiny Darknet
darknet_netron

If I missed something or have a false assumption, feel free to correct me ;)

@Legorock
Copy link
Author

Legorock commented Nov 13, 2019

Hi,
If I had some free time, I would love to help. Unfortunately, this might not be as simple as it seems.
Since darknet topology configurations do not have this kind of information embedded inside, we need some sort of 'shape inference' to figure the intermediate operators tensor shapes.

Looking at ONNX which is the most mature in this context, they still have major problems with their shape inference. If you can think of other simpler ways to fix these kinds of issues, I may be willing to help in the near future. I didn't try but I suspect other neural network formats that are missing intermediate tensor shape info can have this issue as well.

Cheers

@lutzroeder lutzroeder changed the title darknet cfg convolution weights dimensions Darknet cfg convolution weights dimensions Dec 7, 2019
lutzroeder added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 24, 2019
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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants