Skip to content

Conversation

@adamshephard
Copy link
Contributor

@adamshephard adamshephard commented Jul 26, 2022

  • Fix an issue with the HoVer-Net+ post-processing. Previously, a simple blur was applied for the post-processing. Now it is updated inline with the original work - using various morphological operations specific to each epithelial layer.

  • Remove warnings from importing specific libraries in both HoVer-Net and HoVer-Net+.

@adamshephard adamshephard requested a review from shaneahmed July 26, 2022 08:52
@adamshephard adamshephard added the enhancement New feature or request label Jul 26, 2022
@shaneahmed shaneahmed requested a review from vqdang July 26, 2022 09:09
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 26, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #431 (17feb77) into develop (bc5ee15) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop     #431   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    99.65%   99.65%           
========================================
  Files           61       61           
  Lines         6064     6082   +18     
  Branches       995      997    +2     
========================================
+ Hits          6043     6061   +18     
  Misses           9        9           
  Partials        12       12           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
tiatoolbox/models/architecture/hovernet.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
tiatoolbox/models/architecture/hovernetplus.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@John-P
Copy link
Contributor

John-P commented Jul 27, 2022

Looks good. Just a small note on performance, though. I think the cv2 equivalent operations might be a bit faster than the skimage ones. This is minor but could have a bigger impact on a WSI level.

See https://opencv24-python-tutorials.readthedocs.io/en/latest/py_tutorials/py_imgproc/py_morphological_ops/py_morphological_ops.html#morphological-ops

@shaneahmed
Copy link
Member

Looks good to me. I agree with John's comment on using opencv for morphological processing.

@adamshephard
Copy link
Contributor Author

Looks good. Just a small note on performance, though. I think the cv2 equivalent operations might be a bit faster than the skimage ones. This is minor but could have a bigger impact on a WSI level.

See https://opencv24-python-tutorials.readthedocs.io/en/latest/py_tutorials/py_imgproc/py_morphological_ops/py_morphological_ops.html#morphological-ops

Hi John, after looking at this I see that there are no opencv equivalents for the functions that I have used. I've also looked at the source code for these functions, and they rely on scipy anyway. Probably best to keep as it is?

@shaneahmed shaneahmed changed the title UPD: Update HoVer-Net+ Post-processing BUG: Update HoVer-Net+ Post-processing Oct 21, 2022
@shaneahmed shaneahmed merged commit d19d935 into develop Oct 21, 2022
@shaneahmed shaneahmed deleted the bug-hovernetplus-postprocessing branch October 21, 2022 10:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancement New feature or request

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants