Search alternatives:
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
teer decrease » greater decrease (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), nn decrease (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
teer decrease » greater decrease (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), nn decrease (Expand Search)
-
2081
Comparison of MAP@0.5 results from experiments.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2082
YOLO11.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2083
Structure of the SCI-YOLO11 network.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2084
Comparative experimental results.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2085
Algorithm operation steps.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2086
SCI-YOLO11.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2087
Dataset for insulator defect detection.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2088
YOLOV8.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2089
Faster-RCNN.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2090
Results of ablation experiments.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2091
Structure diagram of SPDConv.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2092
Wise-IOU regression diagram.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2093
Visualization of detection results.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2094
Structure diagram of the SE attention mechanism.
Published 2025“…However, small object detection faces numerous challenges, such as significant difficulty, substantial interference from complex backgrounds, and inconsistent annotation quality. …”
-
2095
Map showing the intervention and control LGAs.
Published 2025“…However, post-intervention, the adjusted mean SARI Stigma Score significantly decreased in the intervention group compared to the control group, with an adjusted mean difference of 37.72 (95% CI: 36.01–39.43, p < 0.000).…”
-
2096
Consort diagram.
Published 2025“…However, post-intervention, the adjusted mean SARI Stigma Score significantly decreased in the intervention group compared to the control group, with an adjusted mean difference of 37.72 (95% CI: 36.01–39.43, p < 0.000).…”
-
2097
-
2098
-
2099
-
2100