Skip to content

✨ Multi-dataset General ood eval #162

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

Draft
wants to merge 28 commits into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

✨ Multi-dataset General ood eval #162

wants to merge 28 commits into from

Conversation

fira7s
Copy link
Collaborator

@fira7s fira7s commented Apr 9, 2025

  • Support for multi-dataset OOD eval in classification routine
  • Each datamodule should define near and far OOD datasets to be used by default
  • According to args defined in datamodule (OOD and shift), routine is automatically configured Not possible
  • Add SOTA OOD eval techniques from OpenOOD
  • fix ugly output + add id accuracy using the ood criteria Not needed for now
  • fix imagent 1k eval shift
  • set ood datasets names in output table when using custom datasets
  • add ood datasets to huggingface
  • Add imagenet 200
  • hyperparam search for some ood postprocessors
  • Fix Mnist perf
  • Add ood tutorial
  • fix docstrings
  • fill coverage

@o-laurent
Copy link
Contributor

@fira7s you can install the pre-commits with pre-commit install to avoid linting errors in the CI 🙂

@fira7s
Copy link
Collaborator Author

fira7s commented Apr 10, 2025

My bad i knew it would cause the error but i ignored it @o-laurent i will be also changing more stuff in the routine and datamodules so i may need your opinion after it's done i hope my changes won't break other parts of the library.

@fira7s fira7s requested a review from o-laurent April 10, 2025 07:44
@o-laurent
Copy link
Contributor

Don't worry @fira7s , it was just a piece of friendly advice! I'll have a look, thanks!

@alafage alafage changed the title Multi-dataset General ood eval ✨ Multi-dataset General ood eval May 3, 2025
@o-laurent
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for your work @fira7s
We should put all the configuration files on HuggingFace 😉

@fira7s
Copy link
Collaborator Author

fira7s commented May 23, 2025

@o-laurent Yes indeed, i'm working on merging this into dev right now, i will put all config files on huggingface once i'm finished.

@o-laurent
Copy link
Contributor

(NB: We'll need to squash the PR)

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 18, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 39.02066% with 797 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 89.89%. Comparing base (61791aa) to head (59a0240).
Report is 9 commits behind head on dev.

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
torch_uncertainty/ood/ood_criteria.py 36.19% 303 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
...ertainty/datamodules/classification/imagenet200.py 21.71% 119 Missing ⚠️
torch_uncertainty/routines/classification.py 61.57% 61 Missing and 12 partials ⚠️
torch_uncertainty/ood/nets/ash_net.py 17.91% 55 Missing ⚠️
...uncertainty/datamodules/classification/imagenet.py 41.75% 48 Missing and 5 partials ⚠️
...uncertainty/datamodules/classification/cifar100.py 25.42% 43 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
..._uncertainty/datamodules/classification/cifar10.py 24.56% 43 Missing ⚠️
torch_uncertainty/ood/nets/adascale_net.py 22.50% 31 Missing ⚠️
torch_uncertainty/ood/nets/scale_net.py 26.47% 25 Missing ⚠️
torch_uncertainty/ood/utils.py 45.16% 17 Missing ⚠️
... and 3 more

❌ Your patch check has failed because the patch coverage (39.02%) is below the target coverage (95.00%). You can increase the patch coverage or adjust the target coverage.
❌ Your project check has failed because the head coverage (89.89%) is below the target coverage (95.00%). You can increase the head coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev     #162      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   98.19%   89.89%   -8.31%     
==========================================
  Files         167      175       +8     
  Lines        8662     9847    +1185     
  Branches     1107     1251     +144     
==========================================
+ Hits         8506     8852     +346     
- Misses        101      906     +805     
- Partials       55       89      +34     
Flag Coverage Δ
pytest 89.89% <39.02%> (-8.31%) ⬇️

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.

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.

2 participants