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
This work is very impressive! However, I noticed that the image size for LPV-Base is set to 48x160, but this detail was not mentioned in your paper. Could this be a key reason why it outperforms other methods using 32x128 image sizes? It seems that comparing the results without considering this difference might not be entirely fair.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Apostatee
changed the title
Clarification on Image Size Setting for LPV-Base and Fairness of Comparison
Image Size Setting for LPV-Base and Fairness of Comparison
Sep 3, 2024
Thank you for your interest in our paper. In fact, the structure of our encoder is consistent with SVTR (which is one of the most advanced STR models at the time of our paper was published). And the SVTR-Base model has an input size of 48*160. Therefore, we directly follow this setting.
In addition, through experiments, we can actually find that the change of the image input size does not bring a great impact on the final model performance.
This work is very impressive! However, I noticed that the image size for LPV-Base is set to 48x160, but this detail was not mentioned in your paper. Could this be a key reason why it outperforms other methods using 32x128 image sizes? It seems that comparing the results without considering this difference might not be entirely fair.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: