Latent state estimations for experimental data with time limit for subject 6. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with no stressors for subject 21. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with no stressors for subject 6. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with interruptions for subject 8. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with no stressors for subject 12. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with interruptions for subject 22. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with time limit for subject 1. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with interruptions for subject 1. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with interruptions for subject 4. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with time limit for subject 15. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with no stressors for subject 10. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with interruptions for subject 10. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with no stressors for subject 2. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with time limit for subject 9. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with time limit for subject 12. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with time limit for subject 2. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with interruptions for subject 12. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

Latent state estimations for experimental data with interruptions for subject 20. by Samiul Alam (18563323)

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

“…The results demonstrate that CBFD achieves a average precision of 0.97 for the test image, outperforming Superpoint, Directional Intensified Tertiary Filtering (DITF), Binary Robust Independent Elementary Features (BRIEF), Binary Robust Invariant Scalable Keypoints (BRISK), Speeded Up Robust Features (SURF), and Scale Invariant Feature Transform (SIFT), which achieve scores of 0.95, 0.92, 0.72, 0.66, 0.63 and 0.50 respectively. …”

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

“…The results demonstrate that CBFD achieves a average precision of 0.97 for the test image, outperforming Superpoint, Directional Intensified Tertiary Filtering (DITF), Binary Robust Independent Elementary Features (BRIEF), Binary Robust Invariant Scalable Keypoints (BRISK), Speeded Up Robust Features (SURF), and Scale Invariant Feature Transform (SIFT), which achieve scores of 0.95, 0.92, 0.72, 0.66, 0.63 and 0.50 respectively. …”