Table 1.

Comparison of average nucleus segmentation performance of RGVF snake (Li et al., 2012), multi-scale watershed (Gençtav et al., 2012), FCM (Chankong et al., 2014), and our graph-search based methods on the abnormal cervical cells from the Herlev data (Jantzen et al., 2005). Bold values indicate the best performance for each column.

Methods	Mild dysplasia (182 cells)		Moderate dysplasia (146cells)		Severe dysplasia (197 cells)		Carcinoma (150 cells)
	Precision	Recall	Precision	Recall	Precision	Recall	Precision	Recall
Li et al. (2012)	0.92 ±0.13	0.90±0.16	0.89 ±0.15	0.87 ±0.17	0.88 ±0.15	0.90 ±0.13	0.84 ±0.18	0.88 ±0.11
Gençtav et al. (2012)	0.88 ±0.17	0.86 ±0.16	0.91 ± 0.10	0.86 ±0.14	0.90 ± 0.12	0.89 ±0.11	0.89 ±0.15	0.90 ± 0.08
Chankong et al. (2014)	0.80 ±0.31	0.86 ±0.26	0.81 ±0.25	0.88 ±0.19	0.79 ±0.28	0.88 ±0.21	0.70 ±0.29	0.88 ±0.23
Our method	0.90 ±0.13	0.95 ±0.11	0.90 ±0.11	0.96 ± 0.07	0.91 ± 0.10	0.93 ± 0.12	0.93 ± 0.08	0.91 ± 0.13