Coder Social home page Coder Social logo

visipedia / inat_loc Goto Github PK

View Code? Open in Web Editor NEW
14.0 6.0 2.0 6.87 MB

The iNaturalist Localization Dataset from "On Label Granularity and Object Localization" (ECCV 2022).

Home Page: https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.10225

License: MIT License

computer-vision eccv2022 fine-grained hierarchy inaturalist object-localization taxonomy weakly-supervised wsol dataset

inat_loc's Introduction

Banner

The iNatLoc500 Dataset

The iNaturalist Localization 500 (iNatLoc500) dataset is a large-scale fine-grained dataset for weakly supervised object localization (WSOL). This dataset was released as part of the paper On Label Granularity and Object Localization (ECCV 2022).

Splits

Split # Species # Images Avg. # Images per Species Image-Level Labels? Bounding Boxes? Purpose
train 500 138k 276 Yes No Classifier training
val 500 12.5k 25 Yes Yes Localization evaluation
test 500 12.5k 25 Yes Yes Localization evaluation

Each image in the val and test splits has been checked to ensure that exactly one instance of the species of interest is present and that the bounding box is accurate. Full details on the dataset construction process can be found in the paper.

Label Hierarchy

iNatLoc500 is equipped with a label hierarchy based on the biological tree of life. The levels of the label hierarchy are (from finest to coarsest): species, genus, family, order, class, phylum, kingdom. Since all of the species in iNatLoc500 are animals, the kingdom level has only one node (Animalia). The iNatLoc500 dataset can be labeled at any level of the label hierarchy. For convenience we provide metadata files for each level of the label hierarchy, as described here.

iNatLoc500 Label Hierarchy

Download Instructions

Instructions for downloading the dataset can be found here.

Extras

  • class_mappings: Files that identify correspondences between classes in different datasets.
  • source_image_mappings: Files that link iNatLoc500 images to their sources in iNat17 and iNat21.

Reference

If you find our work useful in your research please consider citing our paper:

@inproceedings{cole2022label,
  title={On Label Granularity and Object Localization},
  author={Cole, Elijah and 
          Wilber, Kimberly and 
          Van Horn, Grant and 
          Yang, Xuan and 
          Fornoni, Marco and 
          Perona, Pietro and 
          Belongie, Serge and 
          Howard, Andrew and 
          Mac Aodha, Oisin},
  booktitle={European Conference on Computer Vision},
  year={2022},
  organization={Springer}.
}

inat_loc's People

Contributors

elijahcole avatar

Stargazers

 avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar

Watchers

 avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar

Forkers

jie311 oatmealliu

inat_loc's Issues

Taxonomy for the hierarchies

Thanks for sharing the dataset! Can you share the taxonomy of the hierarchies for this data? Ideally to load with networkx, but if it is not in that format, that should be fine too.

Image size annotations are different from the actual images

Hi!

Thanks for sharing iNatLoc500 dataset with the perfect hierarchical information! I found it very useful and helpful as an evaluation set for detection tasks.

I am actually using iNatLoc500 dataset for my research. I found the image sizes annotation provided in the dataset is quiet different from the actual image sizes. The difference are mainly caused by the swapped width and height fields in the annotation.

For instance, the test image named "test/Actinopterygii/Cyprinus carpio/05405c328abddbcbbf7596d33b7074d7.jpg" has annotation "test/Actinopterygii/Cyprinus carpio/05405c328abddbcbbf7596d33b7074d7.jpg,800,600". But the actual image size is w=800, h=600 as shown below:
05405c328abddbcbbf7596d33b7074d7

In total, I found 12,085/12,500 erros in val split, and 12,066/12,500 in test split. I can make a pull request to upload the two .JSON files that recorded the difference between the annotation and the actual image sizes, and the corrected image size annotation files for val and test split.

I'd like to ask, is this caused by some rotation in the image data? Moreoever, do the bounding boxes annotations for val and test split also have corresponding errors due to the swapping? Thanks for your answer in advance! It is very important for my evaluation to know if there are also annotation drifts in the bboxes.

Thanks,

Best regards,
Mingxuan Liu

Recommend Projects

  • React photo React

    A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.

  • Vue.js photo Vue.js

    ๐Ÿ–– Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.

  • Typescript photo Typescript

    TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.

  • TensorFlow photo TensorFlow

    An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone

  • Django photo Django

    The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

  • D3 photo D3

    Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. ๐Ÿ“Š๐Ÿ“ˆ๐ŸŽ‰

Recommend Topics

  • javascript

    JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.

  • web

    Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.

  • server

    A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.

  • Machine learning

    Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.

  • Game

    Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.

Recommend Org

  • Facebook photo Facebook

    We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.

  • Microsoft photo Microsoft

    Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.

  • Google photo Google

    Google โค๏ธ Open Source for everyone.

  • D3 photo D3

    Data-Driven Documents codes.