2016
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-45886-1_6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Convolutional Scale Invariance for Semantic Segmentation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In Table 2, we report the results evaluated on the Cityscapes test set and the comparisons with the other state-of-art systems. LDFNet achieves a 71.3% mIoU score without any pretrained model and surpasses all the other methods [10,16] designed for RGB-D semantic segmentation on this benchmark. Moreover, in Table 3, LDFNet outperforms several stateof-art networks for the RGB semantic segmentation task in terms of efficiency, such as DeepLab [2] and PSPNet [20].…”
Section: Evaluation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…In Table 2, we report the results evaluated on the Cityscapes test set and the comparisons with the other state-of-art systems. LDFNet achieves a 71.3% mIoU score without any pretrained model and surpasses all the other methods [10,16] designed for RGB-D semantic segmentation on this benchmark. Moreover, in Table 3, LDFNet outperforms several stateof-art networks for the RGB semantic segmentation task in terms of efficiency, such as DeepLab [2] and PSPNet [20].…”
Section: Evaluation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…The resolution of images and segmentation labels is 1242 × 375 pixels, and the type and number of segmentation class are identical to those of CamVid. For KITTI, however, the segmentation label of the test set is not disclosed publicly; thus, the KITTI database consisting of 445 images and segmentation labels provided in a previous study [32] was in our study. This database was also divided into two subsets, and the two-fold cross validation was conducted to measure the average value.…”
Section: ) Daytime Camvid and Kitti Databasesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, this database does not provide a ground-truth label for the test set. In our study, a total of 445 RGB images and ground-truth labels from the KITTI database provided in a previous study [33] were used. In the same way as the above database, this database was divided into two subsets of 223 and 222 images for a two-fold crossvalidation experiment.…”
Section: A Experimental Databases 1) Camvid and Kitti Databasesmentioning
confidence: 99%