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

Effects of Class Imbalance and Data Scarcity on the Performance of Binary Classification Machine Learning Models Developed Based on ToxCast/Tox21 Assay Data by Changhun Kim (682542)

“…An assay matrix based on CI and DS was prepared for 335 assays with biologically intended target information, and 28 CI assays and 3 DS assays were selected. Thirty models established by combining five molecular fingerprints (i.e., Morgan, MACCS, RDKit, Pattern, and Layered) and six algorithms [i.e., gradient boosting tree, random forest (RF), multi-layered perceptron, <i>k</i>-nearest neighbor, logistic regression, and naive Bayes] were trained using the selected assay data set. …”

RMSE on the test data when fitting (logistic) quadratic models to binary data across increasing measurement error values . by Jakub Stoklosa (3315042)

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. …”

Fig 1 - by Jakub Stoklosa (3315042)

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. …”

Fortran & C++: design fractal-type optical diffractive element by I-Lin Ho (13768960)

“…</p> <p>(2) calculate diffraction fields for fractal and/or grid-matrix (binary) phase-holograms.</p> <p>(3) optimize the fractal and/or grid-matrix holograms for given target diffraction images, using annealing algorithms. …”

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. …”

Thesis-RAMIS-Figs_Slides by Felipe Santibañez-Leal (10967991)

“…<br><br>Finally, although the developed concepts, ideas and algorithms have been developed for inverse problems in geostatistics, the results are applicable to a wide range of disciplines where similar sampling problems need to be faced, included but not limited to design of communication networks, optimal integration and communication of swarms of robots and drones, remote sensing.…”

Supplementary Material 8 by Nishitha R Kumar (19750617)

“…</p><p dir="ltr">When applied to AMR prediction, SMOTE enhances the ability of classification models to accurately identify resistant <i>Escherichia coli</i> strains by balancing the dataset, ensuring that machine learning algorithms do not overlook rare resistance patterns. …”