{"title":"基于Prewitt算法的新型虹膜监测系统的实现与分析,并通过信噪比与Sobel算法进行比较","authors":"D. R. D. Varma, R. Priyanka","doi":"10.1109/ICTACS56270.2022.9988712","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The novel performance analysis of prewitt algorithm for iris monitoring in comparison with the sobel to improve the Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) for improving strength of the signal using. Materials and Methods: The 40 samples were collected using the g power clinical calculator. G1 as the prewitt algorithm with 20 samples and g2 as the sobel algorithm with 20 samples. 80% of power is prescribed for pretest and the acceptable error of 0.05 were used to identify the number of samples. Results: The prewitt algorithm has achieved the predominant performance accuracy of 94.0% when compared to the sobel algorithm with 87.85% of accuracy. The prewitt algorithm has the implication of ($\\mathrm{p} < 0.05$) with the sobel algorithm. Conclusion: The prewitt algorithm is implified greater accuracy when compared with the sobel algorithm.","PeriodicalId":385163,"journal":{"name":"2022 2nd International Conference on Technological Advancements in Computational Sciences (ICTACS)","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementation and Analysis of Novel Iris Monitoring System using Prewitt Algorithm in comparing with Sobel Algorithms by Signal-to-Noise Ratio\",\"authors\":\"D. R. D. Varma, R. Priyanka\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICTACS56270.2022.9988712\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The novel performance analysis of prewitt algorithm for iris monitoring in comparison with the sobel to improve the Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) for improving strength of the signal using. Materials and Methods: The 40 samples were collected using the g power clinical calculator. G1 as the prewitt algorithm with 20 samples and g2 as the sobel algorithm with 20 samples. 80% of power is prescribed for pretest and the acceptable error of 0.05 were used to identify the number of samples. Results: The prewitt algorithm has achieved the predominant performance accuracy of 94.0% when compared to the sobel algorithm with 87.85% of accuracy. The prewitt algorithm has the implication of ($\\\\mathrm{p} < 0.05$) with the sobel algorithm. Conclusion: The prewitt algorithm is implified greater accuracy when compared with the sobel algorithm.\",\"PeriodicalId\":385163,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2022 2nd International Conference on Technological Advancements in Computational Sciences (ICTACS)\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2022 2nd International Conference on Technological Advancements in Computational Sciences (ICTACS)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTACS56270.2022.9988712\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 2nd International Conference on Technological Advancements in Computational Sciences (ICTACS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTACS56270.2022.9988712","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Implementation and Analysis of Novel Iris Monitoring System using Prewitt Algorithm in comparing with Sobel Algorithms by Signal-to-Noise Ratio
The novel performance analysis of prewitt algorithm for iris monitoring in comparison with the sobel to improve the Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) for improving strength of the signal using. Materials and Methods: The 40 samples were collected using the g power clinical calculator. G1 as the prewitt algorithm with 20 samples and g2 as the sobel algorithm with 20 samples. 80% of power is prescribed for pretest and the acceptable error of 0.05 were used to identify the number of samples. Results: The prewitt algorithm has achieved the predominant performance accuracy of 94.0% when compared to the sobel algorithm with 87.85% of accuracy. The prewitt algorithm has the implication of ($\mathrm{p} < 0.05$) with the sobel algorithm. Conclusion: The prewitt algorithm is implified greater accuracy when compared with the sobel algorithm.