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
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 31, 2023. It is now read-only.
I greatly enjoyed reading your paper but I'm curious about the segmentation performance of such models. Do MSNs share the same segmentation properties as DINO?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Great question! We didn't check segmentation properties, but just released the pre-trained models so you're welcome to check!
My thoughts:
In general, MSN introduces an additional mask invariance, which helps the model discard a lot of instance-level information and produce more abstract representations. This property is helpful for low-shot semantic abstraction tasks, but I imagine could hurt performance on low-level tasks like segmentation. In short, I would expect performance to be similar to DINO on segmentation, although I would be a little surprised if it was better by any significant margin. Having said this, I have not personally checked and would be curious to learn about your findings if you try this.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
I greatly enjoyed reading your paper but I'm curious about the segmentation performance of such models. Do MSNs share the same segmentation properties as DINO?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: