The documentation of experiments and method explanation need to be improved. For example:
Section 1 Paragraph 2: "Fig. 1a, the standard variance of the scale of instances in MS-COCO is 188.4, while that of ImageNet is 56.7" what is the unit of measure? Also, the images were resized differently therefore the statistics are incomparable.
Section 3.1 "Towards handling the large scale variation, the s is selected from {1, 2, 3, 4}, which also matches the sizes of feature maps in FPN and the label assignment rules" . It is not clear if the method uniformly samples from the set {1,2,3,4} or that a single number is used. Later, in sec 4.3 it says that s=2 is the optimal scale. It is not clear which value was used for the experiments in table 1.
Section 4.2 "Fig. 1c shows that the discordance between different sizes is alleviated" the setup is not clear, was it measured during the training phase? or did you augment the validation images to measure the discrepancy.
Section 4.3 "Fig. 5 shows that the fraction of valid instances..." the term "valid instances" was not defined. It seems like an important and critical quantity that was not defined explained or further discussed.
5 shows that the fraction of valid instances..." the term "valid instances" was not defined. It seems like an important and critical quantity that was not defined explained or further discussed.