Table 4.

Results from the quantitative evaluation and comparison with results from literature.

	Fractal dimension		Skewness		Kurtosis		Power Spectrum
	Real	Simulated	Real	Simulated	Real	Simulated	Real	Simulated
Bliznakova et al.a	2.36±0.10 b	2.39±0.10 b	0.02±0.17	0.06±0.15
Li et al.c	(2.30, 3.00)d						2.47±0.20
							2.92±0.28
Li et al.e	(2.3, 2.93)b		(−2.0, 2.0)
Li et al.f	(2.50, 2.93)b
Bakic et al.g	2.32±0.10	2.36±0.10
Heine and Velthuizenh							2.76±0.12
Georgsson et al.i	(2.34, 2.70)b
Byng et al.10	(2.23, 2.54)b		(−0.30, 0.20)
Caldwell et al.11	(2.20, 2.50)b
Bochud et al.12			−0.10±0.80	0.10±0.40	2.50±1.00	2.60±0.40		(3.40, 4.0)
Castella et al.13							3.02±0.02	2.92±0.01
Heine et al.14							2.94±0.10
Turasi et al.15	2.71±0.08 d
Kontos et al.16	(2.45, 2.8)d
This study	2.51±0.03d, 4n17
	2.62±0.04d, 4n18	2.55±0.07d	−0.22±0.6417	0.03±0.33	3.33±1.3617	2.75±0.48	2.96±0.0517	2.90±0.08
	2.54±0.12b, 4n17	2.59±0.18b	0.23±0.4918		3.41±0.9018		2.78±0.0718
	2.67±0.11b, 4n18

^aReference ¹⁷.

^bFractal dimension calculated with box-counting technique.

^cReference ³⁷.

^dFractal dimension calculated with power spectral analysis.

^eReference ⁴⁹.

^fReference ⁵⁰.

^gReference ⁵³.

^hReference ³⁹.

ⁱReference ⁵¹.

¹⁰Reference ⁵².

¹¹Reference ⁴⁵.

¹²Reference ⁴⁸.

¹³Reference ⁴⁶.

¹⁴Reference ⁴⁷.

¹⁵Reference ⁴⁴.

¹⁶Reference ²⁵.

¹⁷Results for mammograms from MIAS MiniDatabase.

¹⁸Results for digital mammograms.