TY - GEN
T1 - A Comparison of Optimizer Algorithms in YOLOv8 for Automatic Detection of Knee Landmarks
AU - Supatman,
AU - Yuniarno, Eko Mulyanto
AU - Purnomo, Mauridhi Hery
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 IEEE.
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - Automatic landmark detection in knee x-rays requires an optimizer to improve its performance while shortening training time. The aim of this research is to find a suitable optimizer for the YOLOv8m model for the task. We focus the comparison on six optimizers, including SGD, Adam, AdaMax, AdamW, NAdam, and RAdam. This study used 400 normal Kellgren-Lawrence (KL-0) right knee x-ray images from the Public Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) dataset with 5.600 landmark spatial features. Each knee x-ray image in the dataset is labeled with 14 landmarks on the femur and tibia bones. We resized the knee x-ray image as input to a size of 640×640 pixels, then using the YOLOv8m model with batch size 16 and epoch 150, we carried out training and testing with the SGD, Adam, AdaMax, AdamW, NAdam, and RAdam optimization algorithms one by one. We found that the optimizer average precision (mAP) was 0.696 with the Adam optimizer outperforming the others, while the precision of 0.716 and recall of 0.685 with the AdaMax optimizer outperformed the others, and the fastest time was 0.385 hours with the AdamW optimizer.
AB - Automatic landmark detection in knee x-rays requires an optimizer to improve its performance while shortening training time. The aim of this research is to find a suitable optimizer for the YOLOv8m model for the task. We focus the comparison on six optimizers, including SGD, Adam, AdaMax, AdamW, NAdam, and RAdam. This study used 400 normal Kellgren-Lawrence (KL-0) right knee x-ray images from the Public Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) dataset with 5.600 landmark spatial features. Each knee x-ray image in the dataset is labeled with 14 landmarks on the femur and tibia bones. We resized the knee x-ray image as input to a size of 640×640 pixels, then using the YOLOv8m model with batch size 16 and epoch 150, we carried out training and testing with the SGD, Adam, AdaMax, AdamW, NAdam, and RAdam optimization algorithms one by one. We found that the optimizer average precision (mAP) was 0.696 with the Adam optimizer outperforming the others, while the precision of 0.716 and recall of 0.685 with the AdaMax optimizer outperformed the others, and the fastest time was 0.385 hours with the AdamW optimizer.
KW - Hyperparameter
KW - Knee Landmark
KW - Optimizer
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85186520963
U2 - 10.1109/ICITDA60835.2023.10427072
DO - 10.1109/ICITDA60835.2023.10427072
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85186520963
T3 - ICITDA 2023 - Proceedings of the 2023 8th International Conference on Information Technology and Digital Applications
BT - ICITDA 2023 - Proceedings of the 2023 8th International Conference on Information Technology and Digital Applications
PB - Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.
T2 - 8th International Conference on Information Technology and Digital Applications, ICITDA 2023
Y2 - 17 November 2023 through 18 November 2023
ER -