Skip to main content
. 2022 Sep 27;8:e1098. doi: 10.7717/peerj-cs.1098

Table 2. Comparison of different designs of stem modules.

Method Shared single stem MSMT17
mAP (%) Rank-1 (%)
TCCNet (shared weight) 7 × 7, stride 2 57.3 78.4
16 × 16, stride 16 (non-overlapping) 58.9 77.8
16 × 16, stride 12 (overlapping) 62.8 81.2
Separated double stem
TStem CStem
TCCNet
(w/o shared weight)
16 × 16, stride 16 4 × 4, stride 4 61.6 80.4
8 × 8, stride 8 61.6 79.6
16 × 16, stride 16 62.6 83.5
16 × 16, stride 12 4 × 4, stride 3 63.1 81.1
10 × 10, stride 6 62.9 81.1
16 × 16, stride 12 66.9 84.5