Table 5 Comparison of results using augmented and non-augmented data
From: Species determination using AI machine-learning algorithms: Hebeloma as a case study
Metrics (/100) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Class | CG | Augmentation | Top 1 | Top 3 | Top 5 | MRR | F1m |
Species | 7 | Not augmented | 77.1 | 95.6 | 99.0 | 86.5 | 73.3 |
Species | 7 | Augmented | 75.0 | 95.4 | 98.8 | 85.2 | 72.4 |
Species | 8 | Not augmented | 71.2 | 93.8 | 97.6 | 82.2 | 64.8 |
Species | 8 | Augmented | 76.7 | 95.8 | 99.2 | 86.5 | 72.1 |
Section | 7 | Not augmented | 94.2 | 99.7 | 99.9 | 96.8 | 80.0 |
Section | 7 | Augmented | 94.9 | 99.3 | 99.9 | 97.2 | 82.8 |
Section | 8 | Not augmented | 94.9 | 99.3 | 99.8 | 97.1 | 82.4 |
Section | 8 | Augmented | 94.5 | 99.4 | 100.0 | 97.0 | 80.0 |