Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
Comparison of different algorithms
| Model | Volume | mAP@0.5% |
|---|---|---|
| YOLOv5s | 14.0 | 86.9 |
| YOLOv8s | 22.4 | 86.5 |
| YOLOv6s | 37.4 | 83.0 |
| YOLOv4 | 245.9 | 79.5 |
| SSD | 100.3 | 71.0 |
| YOLOv51 | 93.7 | 89.7 |
| ours | 15.7 | 90.9 |
Incorporation of multiple attention mechanisms
| Attention Mechanism | mAP% | P/% | R/% |
|---|---|---|---|
| +SE | 85.3 | 91.8 | 95.0 |
| +ECA | 86.6 | 92.3 | 94.1 |
| +CCA | 86.4 | 92.0 | 94.6 |
| +SA-Net | 87.8 | 92.5 | 94.7 |
| +MS-CAM | 87.5 | 92.7 | 95.2 |
| +CBAM | 88.5 | 93.2 | 95.8 |
Effect of internal parameters on the model
| Batch Size | Average accuracy | accuracy | recall rate | confidence level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean average precision | Precision P/% | Rcall | (math.) | |
| mAP percent | R/% | Confidence/% | ||
| 10 | 87.4 | 92.0 | 96.1 | 86.0 |
| 13 | 88.3 | 93.4 | 96.0 | 84.0 |
| 16 | 88.7 | 93.7 | 95.0 | 84.0 |
| 18 | 89.4 | 94.3 | 95.9 | 82.0 |
| 20 | 90.3 | 95.2 | 95.7 | 86.0 |
Ablation experiments
| Methods | X | C | L | Person/% | Car/% | mAP% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YOLOv5s | 79.2 | 94.3 | 86.9 | |||
| X-YOLOv5s | √ | 82.3 | 94.4 | 88.3 | ||
| C-YOLOv5s | √ | 81.8 | 95.2 | 88.5 | ||
| L-YOLOv5s | √ | 82.5 | 95.5 | 89.0 | ||
| XC-YOLOv5s | √ | √ | 83.1 | 96.2 | 89.6 | |
| XL-YOLOv5s | √ | √ | 83.4 | 96.6 | 90.0 | |
| CL-YOLOv5s | √ | √ | 83.9 | 96.3 | 90.1 | |
| XCL-YOLOv5s | √ | √ | √ | 84.7 | 97.0 | 90.9 |