You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
To ensure long-term sustainability (keep complexity in check) we need to keep auto3dseg_segresnet_inference.py inference script model-independent.
Instead of if 'whole-head' in model_file, we should have an option called something like KeepLargestConnectedComponent in the model. It should be also nicely documented (it could be just 1-2 sentences as comments at the top of auto3dseg_segresnet_inference.py file) to make it clear for model developers that they are allowed to use it.
I did not emphasize this with BRATS, as I thought that it was an exception - that nobody should follow that example, so no need to generalize. But at least we should document it in auto3dseg_segresnet_inference.py file. If we think that this kind of multichannel input is acceptable (not just a bad workaround) then we should add an option that describes the concept (MultiChannelInput?) and use that option name instead of referring to a specific model name.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
To ensure long-term sustainability (keep complexity in check) we need to keep auto3dseg_segresnet_inference.py inference script model-independent.
Instead of
if 'whole-head' in model_file
, we should have an option called something likeKeepLargestConnectedComponent
in the model. It should be also nicely documented (it could be just 1-2 sentences as comments at the top of auto3dseg_segresnet_inference.py file) to make it clear for model developers that they are allowed to use it.I did not emphasize this with BRATS, as I thought that it was an exception - that nobody should follow that example, so no need to generalize. But at least we should document it in auto3dseg_segresnet_inference.py file. If we think that this kind of multichannel input is acceptable (not just a bad workaround) then we should add an option that describes the concept (MultiChannelInput?) and use that option name instead of referring to a specific model name.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: