CROPPING TECHNIQUES AND RESULT COMPARISON: EVALUATION(4)

Human Based Evaluation

In this section we provide the human based evaluation results with the statistical evaluation. We start analyze the participants rating and then the number of images inside the summary. First we evaluate all different summaries individually and then the common observation. Once again we recall that we evaluate six different summaries with different number of images inside. We use three random window results namely I5-66, I3-75 and I5-85 and three sequential window results namely S3-66, S5-75 and S5-85.

Figure 8 shows the participants rating summary of 10 images. One can observe that the worst result with the highest votes is I5-66. Similarly for the bad, medium and good results with the highest votes are I5-85, I3-75 and S3-66 respectively. The most excellent result is S5-85.
Fig8Generating Representative_decrypted
Figure 8 : Participant ratings for summary of 10-images


Figure 9 shows the participants rating summary of 15 images. One can observe that the worst result with the highest votes is I5-66. Similarly for the bad, medium and good results with the highest votes are I5-66, I3-75 and S5-75 respectively. The most excellent result is again S5-85 for the summary of 15 images.
Fig9Generating Representative_decrypted
Figure 9 : Participant ratings for summary of 15-images

Figure 10 shows the participants rating summary of 20 images. One can observe that the worst result with the highest votes is again I5-66 which similar to 10 and 15 images results. Similarly for the bad, I3-75 and S5-75 have the highest and same votes. The medium results with the highest and same votes are I5-66, I3-75 and S3-66. The good and excellent with the highest votes is S5-85.
Fig10Generating Representative_decrypted
Figure 10 : Participant ratings for summary of 20-images

General observation and points about the summary of 10,15 and 20 images are as following :

• Random window result sets got negative raing with the high portion of votes as worse, bad and medium while sequence window result sets got positive rating with the high portion of the votes in meduim, good and excellent.
• If we focus random windows and sequence windows differently, we observe one common thing.When the coverage increase, the result sets with higer coverage secures good and postive ratings.

To undertand these two general observations, we have calculated scores for each summary. So the calculation is based on the evaluators rating. For the ratting worse,bad, medium, good and excellent, we assinged integer number 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively.Now we devised a formula for claculating score of each result sets.

The formula is as following:

Total score = [((NE_worse *1) + (NE_bad *2)+ (NE_medium *3)+ (NE_good*4)+ (NE_excellent*5) ) * 100 ] / Total NE

Representative APR 391%. Average APR for this type of loans is 391%. Let's say you want to borrow $100 for two week. Lender can charge you $15 for borrowing $100 for two weeks. You will need to return $115 to the lender at the end of 2 weeks. The cost of the $100 loan is a $15 finance charge and an annual percentage rate of 391 percent. If you decide to roll over the loan for another two weeks, lender can charge you another $15. If you roll-over the loan three times, the finance charge would climb to $60 to borrow the $100.

Implications of Non-payment: Some lenders in our network may automatically roll over your existing loan for another two weeks if you don't pay back the loan on time. Fees for renewing the loan range from lender to lender. Most of the time these fees equal the fees you paid to get the initial payday loan. We ask lenders in our network to follow legal and ethical collection practices set by industry associations and government agencies. Non-payment of a payday loan might negatively effect your credit history.

Calculate APR