Fig. 4.

Performance of automated skeleton correction, measured against a consensus formed by three manual operators. (a) For cases where all three manual operators identified an equivalent bridging strand (i.e., connecting to the same branch), the automated method established an equivalent strand $71.1\pm 1.7\%$ of the time, a different bridging strand $21.8\pm 4.6\%$ of the time, or elected to remove the endpoint branch from the graph (when no viable candidate strands were found) $7.1\pm 4.1\%$ of the time. (b) For endpoints for which no manual operators identified a valid bridging strand (i.e., all elected to remove the endpoint branch), the automated correction was in agreement $90.1\pm 3.6\%$ of the time, whereas in $9.9\pm 3.6\%$ of cases, the automated algorithm found a viable bridging strand candidate and thus connected the endpoint to the contiguous skeleton.