You note "All results are achieved with the backbone ResNet-101 with output stride 8". Therefore, why the parameters and FLOPs of EMANet are substantially less than the backbone (ResNet-101)? Taking EMANet512 as an example, it contains 10M parameters and 43.1G FLOPs. However, the backbone (ResNet-101) network totally contains 42.6M parameters and 190.6G FLOPs. Are there some errors in this place?
You note "All results are achieved with the backbone ResNet-101 with output stride 8". Therefore, why the parameters and FLOPs of EMANet are substantially less than the backbone (ResNet-101)? Taking EMANet512 as an example, it contains 10M parameters and 43.1G FLOPs. However, the backbone (ResNet-101) network totally contains 42.6M parameters and 190.6G FLOPs. Are there some errors in this place?