Table 2. Performance comparison of different models on the testing dataset; where (R,W): (right,wrong) prediction for Davoudi’s UNet; (R,W): (right,wrong) prediction for DUNet; (r,w):(right,wrong) prediction for ${\mathrm{UNet}}_C$ +DUNet.

	Two-Point							Multi-ellipse							Vasculature
	Simulated				Experimental			Simulated				Experimental			Simulated				Experimental
SR(mm)	Noise(dB)	Prediction			Prediction			Noise(dB)	Prediction			Prediction			Noise(dB)	Prediction			Prediction
39.35	38.06	W	W	w	W	W	w	45.07	W	W	w	W	W	w	47.08	W	W	w	W	W	w
39.79	45.06	W	W	w	W	W	r	52.76	W	W	w	W	W	r	42.34	W	W	w	W	W	w
40.23	48.26	W	W	w	W	W	r	37.72	W	R	w	W	W	r	37.24	W	W	w	W	W	r
40.67	54.36	W	W	w	R	R	r	35.74	W	R	r	W	R	r	52.99	W	W	r	W	W	r
41.11	38.70	R	W	r	R	R	r	48.91	W	R	r	W	R	r	48.43	W	W	r	W	R	r
41.55	47.84	R	R	r	R	R	r	36.38	R	R	r	W	R	r	54.00	W	W	r	W	R	r
41.99	52.48	R	R	r	R	R	r	54.66	R	R	r	R	R	r	39.65	R	R	r	W	R	r
42.43	45.10	R	R	r	R	R	r	52.44	R	R	r	R	R	r	42.00	R	R	r	W	R	r
42.87	52.63	R	R	r	R	R	r	48.11	R	R	r	R	R	r	52.34	R	R	r	W	R	r
43.31	46.36	R	R	r	R	R	r	43.54	R	R	r	R	R	r	48.21	R	R	r	W	R	r
43.75	54.00	R	R	r	R	R	r	53.73	R	R	r	R	R	r	53.22	R	R	r	W	R	r
44.19	49.78	R	R	r	R	R	r	35.41	R	R	r	R	R	r	54.27	R	R	r	W	R	r
44.63	44.85	R	R	r	R	R	r	39.49	R	R	r	R	R	r	39.77	R	R	r	W	R	r
45.07	54.34	R	R	r	R	R	r	49.09	R	R	r	R	R	r	45.76	R	R	r	W	W	r
45.51	45.92	R	R	r	W	R	r	49.11	R	R	r	R	R	r	45.90	R	R	r	W	W	r
45.95	45.75	R	R	r	W	W	r	44.59	R	R	r	W	R	r	52.58	R	R	r	R	W	r
46.39	40.34	R	R	r	W	W	w	51.41	R	R	r	W	R	r	54.21	W	W	w	W	W	w
46.83	39.34	W	W	w	W	W	w	45.75	W	R	r	W	W	r	41.26	W	W	w	W	W	w
47.27	52.29	W	W	w	W	W	w	50.30	W	R	r	W	W	r	47.40	W	W	w	W	W	w
47.71	58.64	W	W	w	W	W	w	54.34	W	W	w	W	W	r	50.55	W	W	w	W	W	w
48.15	51.11	W	W	w	W	W	w	36.35	W	W	w	W	W	w	52.45	W	W	w	W	W	w