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

MapLabelValue for identity mapping #6869

Closed
wyli opened this issue Aug 15, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #6872
Closed

MapLabelValue for identity mapping #6869

wyli opened this issue Aug 15, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #6872

Comments

@wyli
Copy link
Contributor

wyli commented Aug 15, 2023

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
the current label mapping transform raises an error when it's configured to do identity mapping:

if all(o == z for o, z in zip(orig_labels, target_labels)):
raise ValueError("orig_labels and target_labels are exactly the same, should be different to map.")

this logic is too restrictive when building flexible mapping pipelines, would be great to remove the checking.

wyli added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 15, 2023
### Description
- adding pytorch backend support for `MapLabelValue`
- fixes #6869 

### Types of changes
<!--- Put an `x` in all the boxes that apply, and remove the not
applicable items -->
- [x] Non-breaking change (fix or new feature that would not break
existing functionality).
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or new feature that would cause existing
functionality to change).
- [x] New tests added to cover the changes.
- [ ] Integration tests passed locally by running `./runtests.sh -f -u
--net --coverage`.
- [x] Quick tests passed locally by running `./runtests.sh --quick
--unittests --disttests`.
- [x] In-line docstrings updated.
- [x] Documentation updated, tested `make html` command in the `docs/`
folder.

Signed-off-by: Wenqi Li <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant