Skip to main content
. 2011 Feb 9;27(7):933–938. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr053

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6.

(a) Comparison of accurate FISH signal identification. FISH finder accurately identified 84.9% of FISH signals compared with Nemo which accurately identified 24.7%. (b) Comparison from analysis of FISH Finder and Nemo showing percentage of nuclei containing false-positive FISH signals. Nemo identified false-positive FISH signals in 61.9% of nuclei compared with FISH Finder in which 0% of nuclei contained false-positive signals.