Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Sep 6.
Published in final edited form as: IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2011 Aug 22;31(1):117–130. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2011.2165554

Fig. 8.

Fig. 8

Comparison of effective particle number and computational time generated using different particle tracking algorithms. These data were obtained using the same moving neurofilament analyzed in Figs. 7 and 6, and shown in 5. (a) Effective particle number. The asterisks, open circles and open triangles represent the data obtained using GPF with 200 particles, OCPF with 100 particles, and SCPF with 50 particles, respectively. (b) Computational time. Bars from left to right represent the computational time using GPF with 200 particles, GPF with 100 particles, OCPF with 100 particles, OCPF with 50 particles, and SCPF with 50 particles, respectively. Note that the effective particle number is much greater, and the computational time is much less, when using SCPF compared to GPF and OCPF. Thus, SCPF is a more efficient tracking method.