. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jun 3.

Published in final edited form as: IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2015 Dec 25;35(6):1408–1419. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2015.2512711

TABLE I.

Summary of quantitative evaluation of accuracies of the various methods in segmenting the total LV infarct, using 2D geometry-based metrics. Significant differences between the DSC of CMF and those of other methods are indicated by asterisks.

Method	DSC (%)	RMSE (mm)	δA (%)
CMF	76.67±5.84	9.10±10.7	18.53±10.62
CMF3D	*73.21±10.04	11.07±8.77	33.45±29.23
FWHM	*63.57±10.38	13.6±14.4	43.41±24.14
STRM1	*65.63±10.04	18.03±12.05	61.7±54.00
STRM2	*67.40±12.64	14.3±14.6	34.92±34.92
STRM3	*65.88±15.61	13.64±13.7	25.32±24.04
RG	*43.92±14.23	11.88±19.6	97.217±119.8