Illustration of the transformed binary images of normal, benign, and malignant samples into grayscale. by Tehnan I. A. Mohamed (16846175)

Top-performing model configuration and performance by algorithm type. by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

The statistical description of the original data set of the patients (<i>n</i> = 162). by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

The list of parameters of the modified data set for machine learning (<i>n</i> = 162). by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

ROC and PR–AUC curves of the ABC–LR–RF hybrid model for IVF outcome prediction. by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

The accuracy score change matrix following model development. by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

The comparison of the accuracy score of the benchmark and the proposed models. by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

The prediction accuracy of simple versus hybrid models. by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

Flow diagram of the proposed model. by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

Comparison of baseline and hybrid machine learning models in predicting IVF outcomes (%). by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

The most effective active substances for subfertility treatment. by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

Confusion matrix of the ABC–LR–RF hybrid model for IVF outcome prediction. by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

Flow diagram of the conversion of drugs into active substances. by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

Calibration curve of the ABC–LR–RF hybrid model for IVF outcome prediction. by Uğur Ejder (22683228)

Subjects:

Solubility Prediction of Different Forms of Pharmaceuticals in Single and Mixed Solvents Using Symmetric Electrolyte Nonrandom Two-Liquid Segment Activity Coefficient Model by Getachew S. Molla (6416744)

“…Because of the semipredictive nature of the symmetric eNRTL-SAC model, the segment parameter regression is a critical step for solubility prediction accuracy. A particle swarm optimization algorithm is incorporated to preregress conceptual segment parameters of solutes. …”

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. …”

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. …”