Be sure to review our Idea Submission Guidelines for more information!
Submission GuidelinesHello,
After used the new "Image Recognition Tool" a few days, I think you could improve it :
> by adding the dimensional constraints in front of each of the pre-trained models,
> by adding a true tool to divide the training data correctly (in order to have an equivalent number of images for each of the labels)
> at least, allow the tool to use black & white images (I wanted to test it on the MNIST, but the tool tells me that it necessarily needs RGB images) ?
Question : do you in the future allow the user to choose between CPU or GPU usage ?
In any case, thank you again for this new tool, it is certainly perfectible, but very simple to use, and I sincerely think that it will allow a greater number of people to understand the many use cases made possible thanks to image recognition.
Thank you again
Kévin VANCAPPEL (France ;-))
Thank you again.
Kévin VANCAPPEL
Hi!
Just thought up a simple improvement to the US Geocoder macro that could potentially speed up the results. I'm doing an analysis on some technician data where they visit the same locations over & over again. I'm doing a full year analysis (200k + records) & the geocoder takes a bit to churn thru that much data. In the case of my data though, it's the same addresses over & over again & the geocoder will go thru each one individually.
What I did in my process & could be added to the macro is to put a unique tool into the process based off address, city, state, zip, then Geocode the reduced list, then simply join back to the original data stream using a join based off the address, city, state, zip fields (or use record id tool to created a unique process id to join off).
In my case, the 200k records were reduced to 25k, which Alteryx completed in under a minute, then joined back so my output was still the 200k records (all geocoded now).
Not everyone will have this many duplicates, but I'd bet most data has a few, & every little bit of time savings helps when management is waiting on the results haha!
Ability to ‘name’ the point created in the “Create Points” tool.
Instead of sticking a select tool after it to rename it from ‘centroid’ to Starting Location or Store location or whatever.
When a user wants to use the find nearest to say find the nearest within 200 miles the dropdown stops at 100.
Similar if they want a number in between IE 15 the interface is not intuitive.
While you can just type the number in the interface doesn't look like you are able to.
Simply adding a "Custom" selection at the bottom would make this much more intuitive.
The Find Nearest tool allows setting a distance in units of miles and kilometers. It would be incredibly convenient to specify units of feet or meters also. I find that in most instances, 1 mile is vastly large for the analysis I am working on and I have to include additional logic to confirm incorrect matching is not occurring.