Table 5 Comparative analysis of proposed work with the state of Art models.
Author works form literature survey | Knee joint X-ray view | Classification Accuracy |
|---|---|---|
Mahrukh et al.19 | AP view | 97.1% |
Subramaniam et al.20 | AP view | 90.0% |
Navale et al.21 | AP view | 80.0% |
Antony et al.22 | AP view | 63.6% |
Tiulpin et al.23 | AP view | 66.7% |
Suresha et al.24 | AP view | 67.1% |
Mengko et al.25 | AP view | 92.4% |
Liu et al.26 | AP view | 74.3% |
Sameh et al.27 | AP view | 95.9% |
Schiratti et al.28 | AP view | 65% |
Wang et al.29 | AP view | 69.18% |
Kondal et al.30 | AP view | 87% |
Kokkotis et al.31 | AP view | 73.55% |
Tolpadi et al.32 | AP view | 61% |
Chen et al.33 | AP view | 69.7% |
Abdullah et al.34 | AP view | 98.9% |
Proposed work | AP view | 98.507% |
Proposed work | Lateral view | 92.42% |
