Skip to main content

Table 3 The five networks that achieved the best results were compared regarding parameters and computational time over ten-fold cross-validation (mean ± standard deviation)

From: Segmentation and counting of wheat spike grains based on deep learning and textural feature

Model

Backbone

Optimizer

Number of parameters/million

Training time (s/epoch)

Segmentation time (ms/image)

CABM-HRNet

hrnetv2_w32

Adam

30.598

90.75 ± 0.825

12.75 ± 0.093

HRNet

hrnetv2_w32

Adam

29.547

91.02 ± 0.559

12.65 ± 0.052

PSPNet

ResNet50

Adam

2.377

108.56 ± 0.658

9.98 ± 0.076

DeeplabV3 + 

MobileNetv2

Adam

5.818

89.29 ± 0.612

8.62 ± 0.105

U-Net

VGG

Adam

24.892

138.11 ± 1.744

9.59 ± 0.070

  1. CBAM has a lower overhead and computational load