ArticleScientific reports2025
An optimized YOLO NAS based framework for realtime object detection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research on lung nodule detection in X-ray plain films based on improved YOLOv12 model.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Integrating morphological and deep learning approaches for the identification of economically important nematode genera in vineyards:Helminthologia · 2026Article
- AE-LFOG-YOLO: robust safety helmet detection via adaptive anchors and illumination invariant learning.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An enhanced version of the YOLO-NAS object detection network model has been presented in this paper, and MISH activation and Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) optimization algorithms are integrated. MISH functional adds non-monotonic behavior, which at the same time enhances the feature representation and complements the gradient flow. ABC optimization that assists in the optimization of the hyperparameters to a ground truth and resistance to the models. The given model is tested on the dataset that is introduced by the researchers themselves, and it shows better results compared to baselines based on the YOLO-NAS variants in precision, recall, and mean average precision (mAP) measures. Experiments prove the fact that a combination of a biologically inspired optimizer and a contemporary activation function helps to make training more stable and predictions more accurate. The results show that the proposed fine-tuned YOLO-NAS model outperformed the other tested models, that is, YOLOv6, YOLOv7, and YOLOv8, in the three metrics of accuracy, recall, precision, F1 score, and mAP at 0.50, 0.75, and 0.95 on the test dataset. The proposed model achieved an accuracy of 98% while recognizing real-time objects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.