Table 2.

Comparing registration performance by the average registration error, RMSE, Pearson correlation, and AIC for the first 20 subjects across all the visual areas defined by the template

Method	$d\left|v\right|$	$F_{\text{flip}}$	Flip ratio %	RMSE	AIC	$p_c$	Time/s
MSMALL	2.59598	0	0.00	1.19358	938.649	0.232	0.00
TPSa	2.85074	0	0.00	1.20956	939.906	0.200	1.99
Benson’s method	2.69152	352	2.98	1.19656	940.354	0.226	4.83
Benson’s maps	2.49742	–	–	1.19708	938.653	0.252	–
D-Demos	2.62774	0	0.00	1.19565	938.888	0.229	3.43
DRRM	2.29358	0	0.00	1.17350	940.004	0.257	7.73

Landmarks/anchors were provided for methods marked with “a”.

Benson’s method results were evaluated based on the output of our custom call of Benson’s public library (Benson 2019). Benson’s maps are evaluated based on its publicly available output (Benson et al. 2022)

Bold indicates the best performance value in the compared methods