Table 4.
Classification and localization performances of the proposed approach via YoloV3 vs. U-Net, MaskRCNN, and ResNet. For each detection metric of U-Net, MaskRCNN, and ResNet, we present the p-value of the statistical difference against YoloV3 performance
| Specificity (p-value) | Sensitivity (p-value) | Accuracy (p-value) | AUC (p-value) | AP (p-value) | IOU | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YoloV3 | 94% | 95% | 95% | 97% | 97% | 56% |
| U-Net | 70% (6 × 10−37) | 64% (7 × 10−66) | 70% (2 × 10−66) | 74% (2 × 10−47) | 75% (3 × 10−48) | 60% |
| MaskRCNN | 64% (3 × 10−50) | 45% (2 × 10−95) | 55% (2 × 10−105) | 44% (3 × 10−100) | 51% (10−90) | 89% |
| ResNet | 100% (2 × 10−7) | 59% (8 × 10−69) | 81% (5 × 10−19) | 69% (2 × 10−43) | 77% (10−25) | N/A |