Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Aug 10.
Published in final edited form as: Ann Biomed Eng. 2010 Oct 7;39(1):469–483. doi: 10.1007/s10439-010-0170-8

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Quantitative comparison of AT map spatial coverage and isochronal timing accuracy of the REGROUPS and WM methods to manual outcomes. Data points show Sens., PPV, Aroc, and CCS, computed for Δtmax = 5 s (see text for description of these quantities). Outcomes for each of four experimental test case are represented in columns. Filled and unfilled markers indicate the result for the REGROUPS and WM algorithms, respectively. Each series of five points in Experiments (“Exp.”) 1–4 corresponds to each of five partitioned SW cycles shown in Figs. 3, 4, 5, and 6, respectively. The REGROUPS method was observed to achieve more accurate overall spatial coverage (Aroc) and more consistent timing accuracy (CCS) than the WM method across almost all partitioned cycles