Description of the datasets. by Chenyi Zhu (9383370)

“…To adapt to the feature selection problem, we convert the continuous optimization algorithm to binary form via transfer function, which further enhances the applicability of the algorithm. …”

S and V shaped transfer functions. by Chenyi Zhu (9383370)

“…To adapt to the feature selection problem, we convert the continuous optimization algorithm to binary form via transfer function, which further enhances the applicability of the algorithm. …”

S- and V-Type transfer function diagrams. by Chenyi Zhu (9383370)

“…To adapt to the feature selection problem, we convert the continuous optimization algorithm to binary form via transfer function, which further enhances the applicability of the algorithm. …”

Collaborative hunting behavior. by Chenyi Zhu (9383370)

“…To adapt to the feature selection problem, we convert the continuous optimization algorithm to binary form via transfer function, which further enhances the applicability of the algorithm. …”

Friedman average rank sum test results. by Chenyi Zhu (9383370)

“…To adapt to the feature selection problem, we convert the continuous optimization algorithm to binary form via transfer function, which further enhances the applicability of the algorithm. …”

IRBMO vs. variant comparison adaptation data. by Chenyi Zhu (9383370)

“…To adapt to the feature selection problem, we convert the continuous optimization algorithm to binary form via transfer function, which further enhances the applicability of the algorithm. …”

Data_Sheet_1_Multiclass Classification Based on Combined Motor Imageries.pdf by Cecilia Lindig-León (7889777)

“…And we propose two new multilabel uses of the Common Spatial Pattern (CSP) algorithm to optimize the signal-to-noise ratio, namely MC2CMI and MC2SMI approaches. …”

Flowchart of software workflow. by Gavrielle R. Untracht (11820311)

Sample image for illustration. by Indhumathi S. (19173013)

“…Furthermore, the matching score for the test image is 0.975. The computation time for CBFD is 2.8 ms, which is at least 6.7% lower than that of other algorithms. …”

Quadratic polynomial in 2D image plane. by Indhumathi S. (19173013)

“…Furthermore, the matching score for the test image is 0.975. The computation time for CBFD is 2.8 ms, which is at least 6.7% lower than that of other algorithms. …”

Steps in the extraction of 14 coordinates from the CT slices for the curved MPR. by Linus Woitke (22783534)

“…Protruding paths are then eliminated using graph-based optimization algorithms, as demonstrated in f). …”

DataSheet_1_Multi-Parametric MRI-Based Radiomics Models for Predicting Molecular Subtype and Androgen Receptor Expression in Breast Cancer.docx by Yuhong Huang (115702)

“…We applied several feature selection strategies including the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), and recursive feature elimination (RFE), the maximum relevance minimum redundancy (mRMR), Boruta and Pearson correlation analysis, to select the most optimal features. We then built 120 diagnostic models using distinct classification algorithms and feature sets divided by MRI sequences and selection strategies to predict molecular subtype and AR expression of breast cancer in the testing dataset of leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV). …”

Presentation_1_Modified GAN Augmentation Algorithms for the MRI-Classification of Myocardial Scar Tissue in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.PPTX by Umesh C. Sharma (10785063)

“…Currently, there are no optimized deep-learning algorithms for the automated classification of scarred vs. normal myocardium. …”

Table_1_An efficient decision support system for leukemia identification utilizing nature-inspired deep feature optimization.pdf by Muhammad Awais (263096)

“…To optimize feature selection, a customized binary Grey Wolf Algorithm is utilized, achieving an impressive 80% reduction in feature size while preserving key discriminative information. …”

Comparison analysis of computation time. by Indhumathi S. (19173013)

“…Furthermore, the matching score for the test image is 0.975. The computation time for CBFD is 2.8 ms, which is at least 6.7% lower than that of other algorithms. …”

Process flow diagram of CBFD. by Indhumathi S. (19173013)

“…Furthermore, the matching score for the test image is 0.975. The computation time for CBFD is 2.8 ms, which is at least 6.7% lower than that of other algorithms. …”

Precision recall curve. by Indhumathi S. (19173013)

“…Furthermore, the matching score for the test image is 0.975. The computation time for CBFD is 2.8 ms, which is at least 6.7% lower than that of other algorithms. …”

Symmetry test result. by Jiyong Moon (16819302)

Supplementary file 1_Comparative evaluation of fast-learning classification algorithms for urban forest tree species identification using EO-1 hyperion hyperspectral imagery.docx by Veera Narayana Balabathina (22518524)

“…</p>Methods<p>Thirteen supervised classification algorithms were comparatively evaluated, encompassing traditional spectral/statistical classifiers—Maximum Likelihood, Mahalanobis Distance, Minimum Distance, Parallelepiped, Spectral Angle Mapper (SAM), Spectral Information Divergence (SID), and Binary Encoding—and machine learning algorithms including Decision Tree (DT), K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest (RF), and Artificial Neural Network (ANN). …”

Fig 12 - by Nisha Yadav (366131)