Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems 2019
DOI: 10.5220/0007724601930198
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Front-View Vehicle Damage Detection using Roadway Surveillance Camera Images

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By looking deeply, we come to understand that the PANet [42] model indicates a very similar performance to the texture descriptor [8] model, and the VGG model [1] demonstrates an almost alike consequence to the combined feature (YOLOv3) [43] model. e differences between the obtained values of recall and precision criteria from the FCOMB [12] model and the suggested model are great numbers equal to 34% and 33%, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…By looking deeply, we come to understand that the PANet [42] model indicates a very similar performance to the texture descriptor [8] model, and the VGG model [1] demonstrates an almost alike consequence to the combined feature (YOLOv3) [43] model. e differences between the obtained values of recall and precision criteria from the FCOMB [12] model and the suggested model are great numbers equal to 34% and 33%, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…As it is clearly indicated, the proposed architecture gained the best results among all the eight other models. Moreover, the FCOMB [12] and VGG [1] strategies have the worst outcome among all the other techniques in terms of all evaluation criteria while the texture descriptor [8] pipeline is the second best model.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation