<p>Comparison of our approach and counterpart algorithms in terms of running time (<i>s</i>).</p
The computation time was measured and averaged for each case of waiting-allowed vs. no-wait paths, a...
Comparing performance of the proposed methods built with different number of individual models.</p
Quantitative comparison between the state-of-the-art SR algorithms on 3 test datasets.</p
Comparison of performance obtained by our approach with other state-of-the-art algorithms.</p
<p>Comparison of running time (seconds) of the algorithms implemented in MATLAB (upper section) and ...
<p>The comparison solving time (s) of two algorithms with coefficient varying.</p
<p>Comparison of the proposed algorithm with the state of the art methods available in literature.</...
<p>Computational times and accuracy comparisons of various algorithms on Schemes 1–4.</p
<p>Each value is the average time in seconds for 10 independent runs.</p><p>Comparison of the comput...
<p>Comparison of time and computing resources used by the compared binning methods.</p
The comparison of the average running time of the examined methods for 150 experiments executed for ...
Computational time comparison of five methods on blocks drawn from six data sets (seconds).</p
<p>The comparison of computational efficiency of each algorithm on the test functions.</p
<p>Comparison of solution performance for distance between BCO and adaptive BCO algorithms.</p
<p>Comparison of the computation speed for the Improved SIFT and the Original SIFT.</p
The computation time was measured and averaged for each case of waiting-allowed vs. no-wait paths, a...
Comparing performance of the proposed methods built with different number of individual models.</p
Quantitative comparison between the state-of-the-art SR algorithms on 3 test datasets.</p
Comparison of performance obtained by our approach with other state-of-the-art algorithms.</p
<p>Comparison of running time (seconds) of the algorithms implemented in MATLAB (upper section) and ...
<p>The comparison solving time (s) of two algorithms with coefficient varying.</p
<p>Comparison of the proposed algorithm with the state of the art methods available in literature.</...
<p>Computational times and accuracy comparisons of various algorithms on Schemes 1–4.</p
<p>Each value is the average time in seconds for 10 independent runs.</p><p>Comparison of the comput...
<p>Comparison of time and computing resources used by the compared binning methods.</p
The comparison of the average running time of the examined methods for 150 experiments executed for ...
Computational time comparison of five methods on blocks drawn from six data sets (seconds).</p
<p>The comparison of computational efficiency of each algorithm on the test functions.</p
<p>Comparison of solution performance for distance between BCO and adaptive BCO algorithms.</p
<p>Comparison of the computation speed for the Improved SIFT and the Original SIFT.</p
The computation time was measured and averaged for each case of waiting-allowed vs. no-wait paths, a...
Comparing performance of the proposed methods built with different number of individual models.</p
Quantitative comparison between the state-of-the-art SR algorithms on 3 test datasets.</p
DOI
Add to ORKG