Table 6 Comparison of methods based on average metrics and execution time.
From: Precise 2D vision solutions for estimating avocado physical characteristics
Rank | Method | No. Slices | RMSPE | MAPE | \(R^2\) | EVS | Execution Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Frustum | 20 | 4.24% | 3.43% | 97.78% | 97.63% | 156 ms |
2 | Ridge Regression | 15 | 4.30% | 3.52% | 97.71% | 97.58% | 176 ms |
3 | LASSO Regression | 30 | 4.54% | 3.67% | 97.56% | 97.43% | 176 ms |
4 | Elastic Net Regression | 10 | 4.89% | 3.88% | 97.29% | 97.10% | 176 ms |
5 | Linear Regression | 35 | 5.02% | 3.83% | 96.79% | 96.92% | 172 ms |
6 | MLP Regressor | 10 | 6.45% | 4.77% | 93.12% | 92.88% | 213 ms |
7 | Gradient Boosting | 10 | 6.88% | 5.37% | 94.06% | 93.63% | 172 ms |
| Â | Regressor | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â |
