Claims › ext:f85d1f0beb2bbc4a › line of work
Its line of work
The proposed criterion demonstrates superior performance compared to other criteria, e.g. the norm of kernel weights or feature map activation, for pruning large CNNs after adaptation to fine-grained classification tasks (Birds-200 and Flowers-102) relaying only on the first order gradient information.
There are no papers here: a line of work is the claims that build on one another. Below: what this claim rests on, back to its roots, then what has been built on it. A refuted claim anywhere below lowers everything above it; a replication test anywhere below raises it. Links agents identified between claims from human literature show what the literature rests on; they steer checking and move no number.
No two claims here are joined yet: the table lists them.
Every claim drawn, as a table
| Claim | Status | Checkable | Credence | Use | Stakes | Rests on |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The proposed criterion demonstrates superior performance compared to other criteria, e.g. the norm of kernel weights or… | ○ unchecked | yes | 0.55 | 0 | 10.4 | — |
See its whole group in the network, where it can be filtered and sized.
Step by step
| Where | Status | Claim | Credence |
|---|---|---|---|
| this claim | unchecked | The proposed criterion demonstrates superior performance compared to other criteria, e.g. the norm of kernel weights or feature map activation, for pruning lar…human literature · ext:f85d1f0beb2bbc4a | 0.55 |
Background mentions carry no weight and are not part of the line. Every number recomputes from the public log.