Search alternatives:
lower decrease » larger decrease (Expand Search), linear decrease (Expand Search), we decrease (Expand Search)
teer decrease » greater decrease (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
lower decrease » larger decrease (Expand Search), linear decrease (Expand Search), we decrease (Expand Search)
teer decrease » greater decrease (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
-
3121
Income satisfaction measure.
Published 2025“…We take advantage of 40 years of variation in daily land surface temperature data, finding that one additional exceptionally hot day significantly lowers wellbeing, by roughly 0.5% on average. …”
-
3122
Marginal effect of HTD on income and SWB.
Published 2025“…We take advantage of 40 years of variation in daily land surface temperature data, finding that one additional exceptionally hot day significantly lowers wellbeing, by roughly 0.5% on average. …”
-
3123
Estimation procedure flow-chart.
Published 2025“…We take advantage of 40 years of variation in daily land surface temperature data, finding that one additional exceptionally hot day significantly lowers wellbeing, by roughly 0.5% on average. …”
-
3124
Structural model outline.
Published 2025“…We take advantage of 40 years of variation in daily land surface temperature data, finding that one additional exceptionally hot day significantly lowers wellbeing, by roughly 0.5% on average. …”
-
3125
-
3126
OVX educes bone density of femur.
Published 2025“…Compared to Sham rats, OVX tats had a significant decrease in bone mass and impaired bone micro structure: (L) BMD, (M) BV, (N) BV/TV, (O) Tb.N,(P) Tb.Sp, and (Q) Tb.Th. …”
-
3127
<b> </b> Energy efficiency and gas volume comparison.
Published 2025“…CO₂ yield was higher in the control group at lower temperatures, while the integrated system consistently produced more biochar and biogas. …”
-
3128
Model validation of kinetic parameters.
Published 2025“…CO₂ yield was higher in the control group at lower temperatures, while the integrated system consistently produced more biochar and biogas. …”
-
3129
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%. …”
-
3130
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%. …”
-
3131
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%. …”
-
3132
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%. …”
-
3133
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%. …”
-
3134
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%. …”
-
3135
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%. …”
-
3136
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%. …”
-
3137
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%. …”
-
3138
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%. …”
-
3139
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%. …”
-
3140
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%. …”