<p>Comparison of the proposed method with two relevant methods in terms of mAP and Prec@10 (%).</p
<p>Comparison of the proposed method for detecting affected entities with the baseline method</p
Comparison between our proposed method and alternatives during the dissimilar volatility period.</p
A comparison of the orders of the alternatives of Example 1 for different methods.</p
<p>Comparison of the proposed algorithm with the state of the art methods available in literature.</...
<p>Comparison of the proposed method and the existing methods using dataset (ii).</p
<p>Comparison of the proposed method and the existing methods using dataset (i).</p
Comparison of the proposed method with other conventional methods for throughput of each class.</p
<p>Comparison of classification rates between the proposed method and other methods.</p
Comparison between our proposed method and alternatives during the similar volatility period.</p
Comparison of our proposed method and existing methods on the MS COCO 2014 val.</p
Comparison of our proposed method and existing state-of-the-art methods on the PASCALVOC2012 val and...
Comparison of results obtained with sieving method and image-based method (C = 0.85) (%).</p
<p>Comparing the performance of the proposed method with other existing methods.</p
A comparison of the orders of the alternatives of Example 2 for different methods.</p
<p>Comparison between traditional and proposed methods in three different databases.</p
<p>Comparison of the proposed method for detecting affected entities with the baseline method</p
Comparison between our proposed method and alternatives during the dissimilar volatility period.</p
A comparison of the orders of the alternatives of Example 1 for different methods.</p
<p>Comparison of the proposed algorithm with the state of the art methods available in literature.</...
<p>Comparison of the proposed method and the existing methods using dataset (ii).</p
<p>Comparison of the proposed method and the existing methods using dataset (i).</p
Comparison of the proposed method with other conventional methods for throughput of each class.</p
<p>Comparison of classification rates between the proposed method and other methods.</p
Comparison between our proposed method and alternatives during the similar volatility period.</p
Comparison of our proposed method and existing methods on the MS COCO 2014 val.</p
Comparison of our proposed method and existing state-of-the-art methods on the PASCALVOC2012 val and...
Comparison of results obtained with sieving method and image-based method (C = 0.85) (%).</p
<p>Comparing the performance of the proposed method with other existing methods.</p
A comparison of the orders of the alternatives of Example 2 for different methods.</p
<p>Comparison between traditional and proposed methods in three different databases.</p
<p>Comparison of the proposed method for detecting affected entities with the baseline method</p
Comparison between our proposed method and alternatives during the dissimilar volatility period.</p
A comparison of the orders of the alternatives of Example 1 for different methods.</p
DOI
Add to ORKG