Table 3.
Comparison of the segmentations produced on T1w and T2w MRIs.
| DC | HD | VS | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Label | T1w | T2w | Delta | T1w | T2w | Delta | T1w | T2w | Delta |
| DG | 0.850 | 0.900 | 0.050 | 4.880 | 2.540 | −2.340 | 0.960 | 0.980 | 0.010 |
| CA1 | 0.819 | 0.868 | 0.049 | 5.170 | 2.448 | −2.722 | 0.907 | 0.952 | 0.045 |
| CA2 | 0.781 | 0.828 | 0.047 | 4.400 | 1.952 | −2.448 | 0.852 | 0.905 | 0.053 |
| CA3 | 0.796 | 0.849 | 0.053 | 4.534 | 2.767 | −1.767 | 0.868 | 0.924 | 0.056 |
| Sub | 0.830 | 0.859 | 0.029 | 5.492 | 2.787 | –2.705 | 0.921 | 0.932 | 0.010 |
MRIs are coming from HCP-development, HCP- young adults, and HCP-aging. Those 15 subjects are a subset of our test set (N = 25). Those subjects are special cases where T1w and T2w MRIs are in the same space, with the same resolution. Deltas in bold denote significant differences at a p-value of < 0.05.