You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
## 📈 Performance of the Models based on the Accuracy Scores
@@ -76,13 +73,13 @@ The evaluation metrics I used to assess the models:
76
73
| Model | Accuracy | Loss |
77
74
|------------|----------|---------|
78
75
| VGG16 | 0.925 | 0.218 |
79
-
| YOLOv8 | 0.925|0.218|
76
+
| YOLOv8 | 0.561|-|
80
77
| Mobilenet SSD | 0.979 | 0.184 |
81
78
82
79
## 📢 Conclusion
83
80
Based on the results we can draw the following conclusions:
84
81
1. VGG16: The VGG16 model achieved a higher accuracy of 0.925 and a lower loss of 0.218. It outperformed the YOLOv8 model, indicating that the architecture of VGG16 with its specialized design for object detection could capture more complex features and generalize better.
85
-
2. YOLOv8: The YOLOv8 model achieved an accuracy of 0.728 and a loss of 1.159. It performed reasonably well, but there is room for improvement.
82
+
2. YOLOv8: The YOLOv8 model achieved a F1 Confidence of 0.561. It performed reasonably well, but there is room for improvement.
86
83
3. Mobilenet SSD: The MobileNet SSD model achieved an accuracy of 0.979 and a loss of 0.184. It performed better than both the VGG16 and YOLOv8 models. MobileNet SSD's lightweight architecture and efficient design helped in achieving a high accuracy while maintaining computational efficiency.
0 commit comments