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

Is there any quantitative analysis of the experimental results of MSA and EMSA? #4

Closed
superPangpang opened this issue Jun 1, 2021 · 3 comments

Comments

@superPangpang
Copy link

I think it is a necessary ablation study to make a quantitative comparison of performance and efficiency of the two modules. But it's not in the paper

@wofmanaf
Copy link
Owner

wofmanaf commented Jun 1, 2021

I agree with you, the results of the quantitative comparison between MSA and EMSA will be available soon.

@wofmanaf
Copy link
Owner

wofmanaf commented Jun 3, 2021

Follow the same setting as the ablation study. Batch size for MSA is 512 (one V100 GPU can only tackle 64 images at the same time), for EMSA is 2048. Results of ResT-Lite:

Backbones #Param (M) FLOPs (G) Throughput Top-1 Top-5
MSA 10.48 1.6 512 72.68 90.46
EMSA 10.49 1.4 1246 72.88 90.62

@wofmanaf
Copy link
Owner

wofmanaf commented Jun 8, 2021

The quantitative comparison between MSA and EMSA has been released in the version v3

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants