Systematic Analysis of Deep Learning Models for Performance Assessment

Résumé fourni par la source

Deep learning has evolved into a major computational paradigm for solving complex problems involving image understanding, remote sensing, human activity recognition, graph-based learning, and other data-intensive applications. However, the increasing diversity of deep learning architectures has made model selection and performance assessment more difficult because predictive effectiveness must be evaluated alongside computational complexity, robustness, scalability, and deployment requirements. This article presents a systematic analysis of deep learning models by synthesizing existing research on fundamental deep learning techniques, neural network architectures, application-specific models, robustness, and hardware acceleration. The review comparatively examines conventional deep learning approaches, convolutional neural networks, graph convolutional neural networks, robust deep learning models, and application-oriented architectures. Particular attention is given to the relationship between model architecture and performance dimensions such as accuracy, generalization, computational efficiency, scalability, and practical deployability. The analysis indicates that no single deep learning architecture is universally optimal; rather, performance depends strongly on data characteristics, task requirements, architectural complexity, and computational resources. CNN-oriented models demonstrate strong suitability for spatial and visual information, graph-based approaches provide advantages for relational data but introduce substantial acceleration challenges, and robust learning approaches address reliability concerns that conventional accuracy-oriented evaluation may overlook. The study establishes a multidimensional framework for assessing deep learning performance and identifies the need for evaluation strategies that jointly consider predictive capability, robustness, computational cost, and deployment constraints.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.