Hello,
The CIFAR100 super-class used here are quite different from the standard division described here
This can be easily seen by comparing to other implementations that follow the standard division, e.g. here or here
As you can see there is shifting between the fine-grained classes inside each super-class
I think this makes results presented here not comparable to other results on the literature and would need to be re-done
Hello,
The CIFAR100 super-class used here are quite different from the standard division described here
This can be easily seen by comparing to other implementations that follow the standard division, e.g. here or here
As you can see there is shifting between the fine-grained classes inside each super-class
I think this makes results presented here not comparable to other results on the literature and would need to be re-done