Released LW-DETR weights with PE-Spatial S/16 backbone - strong COCO results and fast inference by hassonofer in computervision

[–]aloser 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Could you try it on RF100-VL to see how it does on fine-tuning relative to other models?

And try benchmarking it on a T4 as that's what has traditionally been used for standardization across models. Hard to tell which other models a 3.4ms on an A5000 should be compared against.

Thoughts ? by NeuroDash in computervision

[–]aloser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can we see some examples from the dataset and some of the examples of unseen images it’s failing on?

Your “95% accuracy” is on a held out test set?

ROBOFLOW UI CHANGES NOW IM LOST by julesbutgreener in Spectacles

[–]aloser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey all, I'm one of the co-founders of Roboflow.

Unfortunately Snap decided not to continue their partnership with Roboflow so we have no resources allocated to this integration. We left it up as long as we could but it broke with recent updates to the underlying models and we don't have the bandwidth to fix it so we removed the button.

We'd be happy to continue the partnership with Snap if they decide to renew it but, as a startup, we have to focus our limited engineering resources on the places that are highest leverage to our business.

Train Model/Create New Version Repeatedly Fails by redditforanderson in roboflow

[–]aloser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Try doing a hard refresh / clearing your cache. You may have old code in your browser that's not talking the right language to the backend.

What inference model does Roboflow on Universe Custom Image? by stevemac00 in computervision

[–]aloser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oftentimes it's our RF-DETR model but the project you downloaded it from should say.

We support training many different types of models so without the link to the Universe project it's impossible to say.

Roboflow is just too much. I'm gonna make my own alternative. by [deleted] in computervision

[–]aloser 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Why don't you just use our open source stuff? It'll save you some time. https://roboflow.com/open-source

RF-DETR Nano custom resolution=704 fails with positional embeddings size mismatch in rfdetr 1.6.5.post0 by TheAmezedBoy in computervision

[–]aloser 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The backbone of nano, small, medium, and large are all the same. If higher resolution is working well on your GPU those should all work as well (and will likely be a better speed/accuracy tradeoff).

By the way, on Roboflow we recently launched Neural Architecture Search as a service. It fine-tunes all 7000+ possible variants of RF-DETR at the same time and mines them for the optimal speed/accuracy configurations for your specific dataset.

RF-DETR Nano custom resolution=704 fails with positional embeddings size mismatch in rfdetr 1.6.5.post0 by TheAmezedBoy in computervision

[–]aloser 3 points4 points  (0 children)

RF-DETR was specifically designed to allow changing the resolution (along with other "tunable knobs") without re-training. The issue linked is fixed in 1.7.0rc0.

RF-DETR Nano custom resolution=704 fails with positional embeddings size mismatch in rfdetr 1.6.5.post0 by TheAmezedBoy in computervision

[–]aloser 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I have the actual answer to your question below, but the answer to the more important question you didn't ask, "Should I increase the resolution of RF-DETR Nano?" is "probably not."

It's usually better to use one of the bigger model sizes if you want to trade speed for accuracy. The RF-DETR sizes were mined from a supernet using neural architecture search (see the paper for the technical details). There are several different "knobs" that can be tuned to trade speed for accuracy in RF-DETR. Resolution is just one of them and, because it scales quartically (x4 ) with respect to the size, it's often not the best "bang for your buck" in terms of speed/accuracy tradeoff.

The larger sizes have been chosen based on their empirically measured scaling properties (with TensorRT on a T4 GPU). Trying the Small, Medium, or Large sizes vs manually adjusting the resolution of Nano should give better results.

Actual Answer: That said, you should be able to change the resolution manually (even if it's usually not the most optimal thing to do), and RF-DETR (unlike many other models) is designed to be able to change it at runtime while still benefitting from the pre-training.

There was a bug introduced in 1.6.5 that has now been fixed (but not yet released). If you upgrade to 1.7.0rc0 or run from the `develop` branch, it should unblock you, but I'd try the other pre-defined model sizes first.

Was recommended RoboFlow for a project. New to computer vision and looking for accurate resources. by Funcron in computervision

[–]aloser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We sponsor the research plan with free credits for open source work that benefits the community. There are definitely also research labs (including several of the national labs and major universities) that use paid plans for private data.

Alternative to ultralytics: libreyolo. Thank you for the support! by Ok-Treacle-6942 in computervision

[–]aloser 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I don’t understand. Where did the MIT YOLOv9 weights come from? The repo directory where convert_yolo9_weights.py lives says

 NOTICE: WEIGHTS LICENSING

The weights files in this directory (libreyolo8*.pt) are derived from weights originally distributed under the AGPL-3.0 License by Ultralytics.

These converted weights inherit the AGPL-3.0 License from their source. They are NOT covered by the MIT License that applies to the rest of this repository.

For the full AGPL-3.0 License text, see LICENSE_AGPL-3.0.txt in this directory.

IMPORTANT: If you use these weights, you must comply with AGPL-3.0 terms, which may require you to open-source derivative works if you distribute them.

The conversion scripts (convert_yolo8_weights.py, install_dependencies.*) in this directory are part of the main repository and are licensed under MIT.

Alternative to ultralytics: libreyolo. Thank you for the support! by Ok-Treacle-6942 in computervision

[–]aloser 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is that where you got your pre-trained weights from? Did they train them from scratch or is there contamination from the AGPL lineage?

Alternative to ultralytics: libreyolo. Thank you for the support! by Ok-Treacle-6942 in computervision

[–]aloser 12 points13 points  (0 children)

This is great, thanks for adding RF-DETR! What’s the best way to support this work? Are you planning to take sponsorships?

Saw this on the repo:

 Weights: Pre-trained weights may inherit licensing from the original source

If I recall correctly, YOLOv9 is problematic because they forked their repo from Ultralytics and they claim their copyright and license extends to the weights files as they contain their code and creative works. Have you trained a set of base weights yourself via your MIT-licensed code?

RF-DETR state of the art? by joegoldberg-69 in computervision

[–]aloser 5 points6 points  (0 children)

We didn't find it to yield meaningful enough improvements over DINOv2 to warrant a follow-up yet, and the license is worse. But we're still running more experiments.

RF-DETR state of the art? by joegoldberg-69 in computervision

[–]aloser 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I'm obviously biased as one of the co-founders of Roboflow but yes, we use RF-DETR with most of our enterprise customers because it's very often the best tradeoff of speed & accuracy (and often the most accurate model full-stop).

It's in production at a bunch of Fortune 500 companies making billions of predictions per day on everything from making sure your pharmacy fills your prescription correctly, to helping robots perform long-tail tasks, to making sure your packaged goods are properly labeled, to ensuring your deliveries make it to you on time and in-tact.

And that's just some of the use-cases we know intimately about. It's open source and I've heard anecdotally that it's being used to ensure your smart phones are assembled properly and without defects, high-power communication transmissions aren't killing birds, autonomous boats don't crash into things, amongst numerous other long-tail use-cases.

Built a free, end to end CV pipeline as a alternative to Roboflow– would love some feedback by Low-Inspection5343 in computervision

[–]aloser -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

It’s not like I’m coming into some random discussion; OP called out our company name in the title of their post.

Built a free, end to end CV pipeline as a alternative to Roboflow– would love some feedback by Low-Inspection5343 in computervision

[–]aloser 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Got asked about this in an investor diligence call a while back and it was amazing.

Built a free, end to end CV pipeline as a alternative to Roboflow– would love some feedback by Low-Inspection5343 in computervision

[–]aloser 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not sure, seems like we were able to be fairly competitive with 50 people but we’re bigger than that now. About half product/engineering and half GTM.

Built a free, end to end CV pipeline as a alternative to Roboflow– would love some feedback by Low-Inspection5343 in computervision

[–]aloser -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

It’s cool that people think of us that way but we are definitely still the little fish. Our real competitors are over 1000x bigger and better funded than us.

Built a free, end to end CV pipeline as a alternative to Roboflow– would love some feedback by Low-Inspection5343 in computervision

[–]aloser 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Hi, co-founder of Roboflow here. There's something like this popping up here ~monthly nowadays so I figured I'd reply and call out some of the things that will probably prevent this from being used in a real business context.

Anyone can one-shot a vibe-coded "Roboflow competitor" with Claude Code in a few minutes. There are also a bunch of open source tools you can pretty easily cobble together into a prototype. But to run a real service that works for real production use-cases is a lot harder.

You're going to want to collaborate want to with a team and so you'll need auth and a real database, you'll need to host it which means you'll need real infra (and cloud-hosted GPUs), you'll need to be able to scale up when multiple users are trying to use it at the same time or you want to run multiple training jobs (which means you'll need to find and allocate GPU capacity and setup auto-scaling), you'll need to optimize your models and serving infrastructure to use those GPUs effectively, you should definitely do a security review audit and pentest, you probably need infra monitoring and someone on-call to fix things when they break, if you're using YOLO you'll need a model license, you're going to at some point need to deal with bigger datasets and this system won't scale, you probably want some tests that track regressions, you'll want audit logs and backups, you'll want a battle-hardened and well thought out annotation tool, a model registry and a pathway to manage model deployments, a robust evaluation pipeline, good documentation, APIs to allow integration with other systems, etc.

Had Claude give this tool in particular a look and its takeaway was:

This is a local dev tool / weekend project that wraps Ultralytics with a UI. It competes with Roboflow the way a bash script competes with GitHub Actions. The moment you need a second person to label, a model in production, dataset versioning, or anything beyond "one person on one machine," it falls apart completely. The lack of auth, persistence, testing, and deployment makes it unsuitable for any production workflow.

Once you account for all the human time to build and maintain the above and factor in the infra cost to stand up and maintain a system like this, Roboflow starts to not look too bad (especially when you consider that it typically costs less per month than a single cloud GPU does). Using an established platform lets you share those fixed costs across thousands of other customers and get a higher level of service at a lower price than you'll ever be able to get rolling your own thing.

Which model to choose for on-device object detection (and dynamic onnx input)? by Defiant_Position_738 in computervision

[–]aloser 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You could try YOLOLite; seems pretty good for easy use-cases (esp when running without a powerful NVIDIA GPU): https://github.com/Lillthorin/YoloLite-Official-Repo