# A Convolutional Neural Network as a Potential Tool for Camouflage Assessment
## 3 Experiment 2: YOLO vs. Human Camouflaged Person Detection on Photosimulations
### Results
(**d**) Mean identification conspicuity as a function of the mean search time for stimulus. Note that each datapoint reflects an image used in the experiment. detection probability. Note that here and elsewhere in the manuscript, alpha was set to 0.05. Figure 7c illustrates the identification conspicuity as a function of the detection probability for each frame tested. As is clear from this figure, identification conspicuity correlated positively with the detection probability, Spearman r = 0.76, \(p\) < 0.001, indicating that YOLO predicted the conspicuity performance quite well. The search performance also correlates with the identification conspicuity performance, Spearman r = \(-\)0.84, \(p\) < 0.001 (see Figure 7d), indicating that search times increased with decreasing object identification conspicuity. What is interesting is that these three correlations were significant for each participant (see Table 1). Figure 8 illustrates the mean search time and mean object identification conspicuity as a function of ROI (bush/desert versus urban) and pattern (average versus 1/f) for each background condition. Although our overall aim was not to examine which camouflage suit performed better according to the behavioral measure, for each background condition separately, we conducted a post hoc repeated measures ANOVA on the mean search time and mean object identification conspicuity, with ROI (bush/desert versus urban) and pattern (average versus 1/f) as within subject variables. For the bush/desert background environment (Figure 8, left panels), the ANOVA on the identification conspicuity yielded a significant ROI effect, F(1, 5) = 7.877, \(p\) = 0.038, as the mean conspicuity was smaller when the camouflage suit contained colors from the bush/desert background (5.3 dva) than from the urban background (6.4 dva). The mean conspicuity was smaller when the camouflage pattern was 1/f (5.4 dva) than when it was the average color (6.3 dva), as revealed by a significant pattern effect, F(1, 5) = 71.376, \(p\) < 0.001. The two-way interaction failed to reach significance: F(1, 5) = 5.014, \(p\) = 0.075. The ANOVA on the mean search time yielded a significant ROI effect, F(1, 5) = 50.369, \(p\) < 0.001, as the search times were significantly larger when the suit's color matched the background color (ROI: bush/desert, 883 ms) than when it did not match the background color (ROI: urban, 671 ms). The main effect of pattern and the two-way interaction failed to reach significance: F-values \(\leq\) 3.490, \(p\)-values \(\geq\) 0.12. For the urban background environment (Figure 8, right panels), the ANOVA on the identification conspicuity yielded a significant ROI effect, F(1, 5) = 11.375, \(p\) = 0.020, as the mean conspicuity was larger when the camouflage suit contained colors taken from the bush/desert background (7.6 dva) than from the urban background (6.5 dva). There was a trend towards a significant pattern effect, F(1, 5) = 6.192, \(p\) < 0.055, as the mean conspicuity was smaller when the camouflage pattern was 1/f (6.8 dva) than when the uniform had an average color (7.3 dva). The two-way interaction failed to reach significance: F(1, 5) = 0.609, \(p\) = 0.471. The ANOVA on the mean search time yielded a significant ROI  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline  & \(p\)**(Detection) \(\times\) Search** & \(p\)**(Detection) \(\times\) Conspicuity** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Search \(\times\) Conspicuity**} \\ \hline
**Subject** & **Spearman r** & \(p\)** & **Spearman r** & \(p\)** & **Spearman r** & \(p\)** \\ \hline
1 & \(-\)0.61 & \(<\)0.01 & 0.75 & \(<\)0.001 & \(-\)0.77 & \(<\)0.001 \\
2 & \(-\)0.55 & \(<\)0.001 & 0.77 & \(<\)0.001 & \(-\)0.75 & \(<\)0.001 \\
3 & \(-\)0.56 & \(<\)0.001 & 0.75 & \(<\)0.001 &effect, F(1, 5) = 10.030, \(p\) < 0.025, as the search times were significantly larger when the suit's color matched the background color (ROI: urban, 935 ms) than when it did not match the background color (ROI: bush/desert, 860 ms).