Search alternatives:
point decrease » point increase (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
e point » _ point (Expand Search), 5 point (Expand Search), a point (Expand Search)
point decrease » point increase (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
e point » _ point (Expand Search), 5 point (Expand Search), a point (Expand Search)
-
18981
HG module schematic.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18982
Label data volume and label distribution.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18983
The structure of the context guided block.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18984
SEnet module.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18985
AC-LayeringNetV2 architecture module.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18986
Cracks included in the dataset.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18987
Loss function comparison plot.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18988
Edge device performance benchmarking.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18989
Typical error cases.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18990
Computational efficiency comparison.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18991
-
18992
Exogenous TGF-β delays mortality in HK/483-infected mice.
Published 2010“…<p>BALB/c mice (4–6 weeks old) were inoculated i.n. with PBS (control, <i>n</i> = 10), or 10<sup>4</sup> TCID<sub>50</sub> units of HK/483 virus and 24 hpi inoculated with 10<sup>8</sup> PFU/mouse of a TGF-β-expressing adenovirus (AdTGFβ<sup>223/225</sup>) or a control adenovirus vector (AdDL70) (infected groups, <i>n</i> = 12). …”
-
18993
Backbone comparison in crack detection.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18994
Statistical analysis table for ablation tests.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18995
Summary of false positives and false negatives.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18996
PR parameter comparison chart.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18997
RAK-Conv.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18998
Structure of YOLOv8n.
Published 2025“…Experimental results on a benchmark dataset demonstrate a 2.20% improvement in precision, a 3.50% increase in recall, and a 1.90% rise in mAP@50 compared to the baseline model. …”
-
18999
Measurement of ctDNA at first evaluation.
Published 2016“…<p>Evolution of ctDNA concentration (ng/mL) between baseline (T0) and first evaluation (E1) showing a (A) decrease, (B) increase, (C) normalization, or (D) negativity at both time points. …”
-
19000