Search alternatives:
greatest decrease » treatment decreased (Expand Search), greater increase (Expand Search)
gap decrease » a decrease (Expand Search), gain decreased (Expand Search), step decrease (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), nn decrease (Expand Search)
greatest decrease » treatment decreased (Expand Search), greater increase (Expand Search)
gap decrease » a decrease (Expand Search), gain decreased (Expand Search), step decrease (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), nn decrease (Expand Search)
-
2681
-
2682
Dataset visualization diagram.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2683
Dataset sample images.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2684
Performance comparison of different models.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2685
C2f and BC2f module structure diagrams.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2686
YOLOv8n detection results diagram.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2687
YOLOv8n-BWG model structure diagram.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2688
BiFormer structure diagram.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2689
YOLOv8n-BWG detection results diagram.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2690
GSConv module structure diagram.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2691
Performance comparison of three loss functions.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2692
mAP0.5 Curves of various models.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2693
Network loss function change diagram.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2694
Comparative diagrams of different indicators.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2695
YOLOv8n structure diagram.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2696
Geometric model of the binocular system.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2697
Enhanced dataset sample images.
Published 2025“…Results on a specialized dataset reveal that YOLOv8n-BWG outperforms YOLOv8n by increasing the mean Average Precision (mAP) by 4.2%, boosting recognition speed by 21.3% per second, and decreasing both the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) by 28.9% and model size by 26.3%. …”
-
2698
Accuracy on the ERAM task.
Published 2024“…Using a repeated measures design with a sample of healthy naturally cycling women (N = 63), we investigated whether emotion recognition accuracy varied between the follicular and luteal phases, and whether accuracy related to levels of estrogen (estradiol) and progesterone. …”
-
2699
-
2700