more results

thesis/sections/results.tex

@@ -63,21 +63,61 @@ Additionally, model performance is compared to the three baseline models introdu
 
 \subsubsection{Fertility Probability Prediction}\label{subsubsec:fertility_probability_prediction}
 
-\subsubsection{Impact of Input Resolution}\label{subsubsec:fert_impact_of_input_resolution}
-
-\begin{figure}
-    \centering
-    \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{resources/figures/results/lstm_fertility_results_by_input_length}
-    \caption{Performance of LSTM models with different input window lengths and fixes input resolutions for the fertility probability targets MSE}
-    \label{fig:results_performance_lstm_input_window_length}
-\end{figure}
-
 \subsubsection{Impact of Input Window Length}\label{subsubsec:fert_impact_of_historical_context}
 \begin{figure}
     \centering
-    \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{resources/figures/results/lstm_fertility_results_by_input_length}
-    \caption{Performance of LSTM models with different input resolutions and fixes input window lengths for the fertility probability targets MSE}
-    \label{fig:results_performance_lstm_input_resolution}
+    \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{resources/figures/results/lstm_fertility_results_by_input_length}
+    \caption{Performance of LSTM models with different input window lengths and fixes input resolutions for the fertility probability target}
+    \label{fig:results_performance_lstm_fertility_input_window_length}
+\end{figure}
+\begin{tabular}{lrrrrrrr}
+    \toprule
+    {} & MAE Fertility Overall & MAE Fertile Days & MAE Non-Fertile Days & MSE Fertility Overall & MSE Fertile Days & MSE Non-Fertile Days & Input-Window-Length in Days \\
+    \midrule
+    4  & 0.0378                & 0.0834           & 0.0192               & 0.0043                & 0.0102           & 0.0019               & 160                         \\
+    5  & 0.0399                & 0.0857           & 0.0212               & 0.0045                & 0.0105           & 0.0021               & 10                          \\
+    11 & 0.0421                & 0.0994           & 0.0180               & 0.0052                & 0.0144           & 0.0013               & 20                          \\
+    13 & 0.0420                & 0.1006           & 0.0176               & 0.0053                & 0.0147           & 0.0014               & 80                          \\
+    14 & 0.0406                & 0.0938           & 0.0184               & 0.0049                & 0.0128           & 0.0016               & 40                          \\
+    \bottomrule
+\end{tabular}
+
+
+For the LSTM model, the error metrics show a small improvement with larger input window size.
+Also, the MSE metric is numerically smaller than the MAE, which suggests, that the errors are rather small and tightly clustered with few large outliers.
+For the MSE metric, the non-fertile phase seem to behave inversely proportional to the other both the fertile phase error and the overall error.
+This is not the case for the MAE metric.
+Overall, the improvement over a growing input window size is very small
+
+\begin{figure}
+    \centering
+    \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{resources/figures/results/transformer_fertility_results_by_input_length}
+    \caption{Performance of Transformer models with different input window lengths and fixes input resolutions for the fertility probability target}
+    \label{fig:results_performance_transformer_fertility_input_window_length}
+\end{figure}
+
+\subsubsection{Impact of Input Resolution}\label{subsubsec:fert_impact_of_input_resolution}
+
+Figure~\ref{fig:results_performance_lstm_fertility_input_resolution} presents the results for different input resolutions used in the LSTM models,
+alongside the corresponding mean squared error (MSE) metrics.
+The plot shows the MSE values for three target categories: non-fertile days, overall MSE, and fertile days MSE\@.
+
+Notably, the MSE for non-fertile days appears to behave inversely in relation to the other two metrics.
+However, there is no consistent upward or downward trend when changing the input window length with a fixed input resolution.
+
+\begin{figure}
+    \centering
+    \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{resources/figures/results/transformer_fertility_results_by_input_resolution}
+    \caption{Performance of transformer models with different input window lengths and fixes input resolutions for the fertility probability target}
+    \label{fig:results_performance_transformer_fertility_input_resolution}
+\end{figure}
+
+
+\begin{figure}
+    \centering
+    \includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{resources/figures/results/lstm_fertility_results_by_input_resolution}
+    \caption{Performance of LSTM models with different input resolutions and fixes input window lengths for the fertility probability target}
+    \label{fig:results_performance_lstm_fertility_input_resolution}
 \end{figure}
 
 \subsubsection{Comparison with Baselines}\label{subsubsec:fert_comparison_with_baselines}
@@ -86,9 +126,37 @@ Additionally, model performance is compared to the three baseline models introdu
 
 \subsubsection{Performance around Ovulation}\label{subsubsec:ov_over_performance_around_ovulation}
 
+\subsubsection{Impact of Input Window Length}\label{subsubsec:ov_over_impact_of_historical_context}
+
+\begin{figure}
+    \centering
+    \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{resources/figures/results/lstm_ov_over_results_by_input_length}
+    \caption{Performance of LSTM models with different input window lengths and fixes input resolutions for the ovulation-over target}
+    \label{fig:results_performance_lstm_ov_over_input_window_length}
+\end{figure}
+
+\begin{figure}
+    \centering
+    \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{resources/figures/results/transformer_ov_over_results_by_input_length}
+    \caption{Performance of Transformer models with different input window lengths and fixes input resolutions for the ovulation-over target}
+    \label{fig:results_performance_transformer_ov_over_input_window_length}
+\end{figure}
+
 \subsubsection{Impact of Input Resolution}\label{subsubsec:ov_over_impact_of_input_resolution}
 
-\subsubsection{Impact of Input Window Length}\label{subsubsec:ov_over_impact_of_historical_context}
+
+\begin{figure}
+    \centering
+    \includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{resources/figures/results/lstm_ov_over_results_by_input_resolution}
+    \caption{Performance of LSTM models with different input resolutions and fixes input window lengths for the ovulation-over target}
+    \label{fig:results_performance_lstm_ov_over_input_resolution}
+\end{figure}
+\begin{figure}
+    \centering
+    \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{resources/figures/results/transformer_ov_over_results_by_input_resolution}
+    \caption{Performance of transformer models with different input window lengths and fixes input resolutions for the ovulation-over target}
+    \label{fig:results_performance_transformer_ov_over_input_resolution}
+\end{figure}
 
 \subsubsection{Comparison with Baselines}\label{subsubsec:ov_over_comparison_with_baselines}