<p>A: <i>B</i> = 100. B: <i>B</i> = 20. See <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0137796#pone.0137796.t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a> for the details of the true attachment kernels <i>A</i><sub><i>k</i></sub> used here.</p
<p>Note: numbers marked with.</p>*<p>are approximations based on reported number of degrees of freed...
<p>Comparison of the average precision rates, recall rates and F1 values for the different classific...
<p>Overall the results here show that the most accurate method is ZG04 which is consistently and sig...
<p>A: Jeong’s method. B: Newman’s method. C: Corrected Newman’s method. D: PAFit. The solid line dep...
<p>Relative errors were compared across reference hand <i>d<sub>y</sub></i>s and matching conditions...
<p>Comparison of kernelPLS with four other methods. For 5-fold cross validation classification accur...
<p>Summary of true attachment kernels used in the Monte Carlo simulation. There is a total of 16 dif...
<p>Comparison of kernelPLS with four other methods. For 10-fold cross validation classification accu...
<p>The average relative percent error in estimation of A<sub>1</sub> across different parameter valu...
<p>Average classification accuracy for the different methods; error bars show Confidence Interval. T...
<p><b>ID</b> and <b>Name</b> are as in WALS <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371...
Our method is off by at most 3 frames in 95% cases, whereas the coordinate-based algorithm only atta...
<p>Averages of relative errors of 5 trials from each subject are shown as a function of reference ha...
<p>Each panel compares the average error rate between CLAPPER and competing methods for a particular...
<p>The values of (<i>Z<sub>R</sub></i>−<i>Z<sub>L</sub></i>) from <a href="http://www.plosone.org/ar...
<p>Note: numbers marked with.</p>*<p>are approximations based on reported number of degrees of freed...
<p>Comparison of the average precision rates, recall rates and F1 values for the different classific...
<p>Overall the results here show that the most accurate method is ZG04 which is consistently and sig...
<p>A: Jeong’s method. B: Newman’s method. C: Corrected Newman’s method. D: PAFit. The solid line dep...
<p>Relative errors were compared across reference hand <i>d<sub>y</sub></i>s and matching conditions...
<p>Comparison of kernelPLS with four other methods. For 5-fold cross validation classification accur...
<p>Summary of true attachment kernels used in the Monte Carlo simulation. There is a total of 16 dif...
<p>Comparison of kernelPLS with four other methods. For 10-fold cross validation classification accu...
<p>The average relative percent error in estimation of A<sub>1</sub> across different parameter valu...
<p>Average classification accuracy for the different methods; error bars show Confidence Interval. T...
<p><b>ID</b> and <b>Name</b> are as in WALS <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371...
Our method is off by at most 3 frames in 95% cases, whereas the coordinate-based algorithm only atta...
<p>Averages of relative errors of 5 trials from each subject are shown as a function of reference ha...
<p>Each panel compares the average error rate between CLAPPER and competing methods for a particular...
<p>The values of (<i>Z<sub>R</sub></i>−<i>Z<sub>L</sub></i>) from <a href="http://www.plosone.org/ar...
<p>Note: numbers marked with.</p>*<p>are approximations based on reported number of degrees of freed...
<p>Comparison of the average precision rates, recall rates and F1 values for the different classific...
<p>Overall the results here show that the most accurate method is ZG04 which is consistently and sig...
DOI
Add to ORKG