Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Is the deconvolution layer the same as a convolutional layer?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1609.07009 v1 pith:7MNLZWZV submitted 2016-09-22 cs.CV

classification cs.CV
keywords layerconvolutionalspacesub-pixeldeconvolutionnetworkquestionsanswer
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

In this note, we want to focus on aspects related to two questions most people asked us at CVPR about the network we presented. Firstly, What is the relationship between our proposed layer and the deconvolution layer? And secondly, why are convolutions in low-resolution (LR) space a better choice? These are key questions we tried to answer in the paper, but we were not able to go into as much depth and clarity as we would have liked in the space allowance. To better answer these questions in this note, we first discuss the relationships between the deconvolution layer in the forms of the transposed convolution layer, the sub-pixel convolutional layer and our efficient sub-pixel convolutional layer. We will refer to our efficient sub-pixel convolutional layer as a convolutional layer in LR space to distinguish it from the common sub-pixel convolutional layer. We will then show that for a fixed computational budget and complexity, a network with convolutions exclusively in LR space has more representation power at the same speed than a network that first upsamples the input in high resolution space.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Benchmarking Feature Upsampling Methods for Vision Foundation Models using Interactive Segmentation

    cs.CV 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Interactive segmentation reveals that feature upsampler choice strongly affects dense prediction quality in frozen DINOv2, with LoftUp giving the best results.

  2. LoftUp: Learning a Coordinate-Based Feature Upsampler for Vision Foundation Models

    cs.CV 2025-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A coordinate-based cross-attention transformer, trained with mask-refined and self-distilled pseudo-groundtruth, upsamples VFM features to full resolution and improves downstream task performance.

Pith tools