Showing 1,981 - 2,000 results of 3,661 for search 'significantly ((((larger decrease) OR (nn decrease))) OR (mean decrease))', query time: 0.37s Refine Results
  1. 1981

    The structure of attention gate block [31]. by Yingying Liu (360782)

    Published 2025
    “…The actual accuracy and mean latency time of the model were 92.43% and 260ms, respectively. …”
  2. 1982

    DSC block and its application network structure. by Yingying Liu (360782)

    Published 2025
    “…The actual accuracy and mean latency time of the model were 92.43% and 260ms, respectively. …”
  3. 1983

    The structure of multi-scale residual block [30]. by Yingying Liu (360782)

    Published 2025
    “…The actual accuracy and mean latency time of the model were 92.43% and 260ms, respectively. …”
  4. 1984

    The structure of IRAU and Res2Net+ block [22]. by Yingying Liu (360782)

    Published 2025
    “…The actual accuracy and mean latency time of the model were 92.43% and 260ms, respectively. …”
  5. 1985
  6. 1986
  7. 1987
  8. 1988

    Prediction of transition readiness. by Sharon Barak (4803966)

    Published 2025
    “…In most transition domains, help needed did not decrease with age and was not affected by function. …”
  9. 1989

    Dataset visualization diagram. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”
  10. 1990

    Dataset sample images. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”
  11. 1991

    Performance comparison of different models. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”
  12. 1992

    C2f and BC2f module structure diagrams. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”
  13. 1993

    YOLOv8n detection results diagram. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”
  14. 1994

    YOLOv8n-BWG model structure diagram. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”
  15. 1995

    BiFormer structure diagram. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”
  16. 1996

    YOLOv8n-BWG detection results diagram. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”
  17. 1997

    GSConv module structure diagram. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”
  18. 1998

    Performance comparison of three loss functions. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”
  19. 1999

    mAP0.5 Curves of various models. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”
  20. 2000

    Network loss function change diagram. by Yaojun Zhang (389482)

    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%. …”