TABLE III.

Overview of results (reported as the mean accuracy (in %) ± standard deviation) obtained in comparison to manual reference with the proposed method, the other CNN architectures, and RF. Both indicate that the analysis included both lobes. CT Only means patches from the CT image only, 3 Chan. indicates enhanced images as additional channels, and 3 MI stands for CT and enhanced images used as multiple inputs. The accuracy has been computed separately for each case, and the mean of all obtained scores is reported. For each metric, the top-performing method is reported in bold.

	CNN						RF
	3D			2.5D			/
	CT Only	3 Chan.	3 MI	CT Only	3 Chan.	3 MI	/
Both Acc. (GC)	93.6 ± 4.9	89.1 ± 8.5	91.4 ± 6.7	81.6 ± 12.4	87.5 ± 7.9	87.4 ± 8.6	73.2 ± 10.1
Both Sens. (GC)	97.3 ± 2.5	96.4 ± 2.9	98.1 ± 2.1	98.9 ± 0.8	91.8 ±8.9	98.0 ± 2.2	92.8 ± 2.1
Both Spec. (GC)	89.5 ± 9.2	82.0 ± 18.4	84.0 ± 14.1	62.1 ± 27.8	82.1 ± 14.9	75.6 ± 19.4	53.4 ± 12.6
Both Acc. (No GC)	79.8 ± 6.0	77.2 ± 6.8	77.4 ± 5.8	72.5 ± 5.9	72.1 ± 6.4	75.3 ± 5.9	62.4 ± 8.1
Both Sens. (No GC)	84.1 ± 5.4	83.1 ± 6.2	85.0 ± 5.2	87.5 ± 3.7	74.4 ± 7.8	84.2 ± 4.0	69.5 ± 3.2
Both Spec. (No GC)	74.2 ± 9.2	70.2 ± 11.2	68.5 ± 10.1	54.4 ± 10.5	69.4 ± 9.4	64.7 ± 9.8	52.2 ± 15.8
RSL Acc.	94.3 ± 4.1	89.7 ± 7.3	93.1 ± 4.7	84.7 ± 10.8	87.9 ± 7.1	89.0 ± 6.7	74.3 ± 10.3
RSL Sens.	97.4 ± 2.8	96.4 ± 3.3	97.8 ± 2.9	98.8 ± 0.8	92.5 ± 6.1	98.1 ± 2.8	93.1 ± 7.6
RSL Spec.	90.6 ± 6.5	81.5 ± 15.7	87.2 ± 9.1	66.8 ± 23.9	82.1 ± 14.4	77.6 ± 15.7	50.3 ± 26.8
RIL Acc.	92.8 ± 5.6	88.7 ± 9.4	89.8 ± 8.0	78.9 ± 13.8	87.1 ± 9.2	85.8 ± 10.0	69.2 ± 11.9
RIL Sens.	97.2 ± 2.3	96.5 ± 2.6	98.3 ± 1.0	98.9 ± 0.7	91.2 ± 11.6	98.0 ± 1.5	94.6 ± 8.6
RIL Spec.	87.5 ± 11.3	79.2 ± 20.5	79.9 ± 17.2	55.4 ± 30.8	82.2 ± 17.1	71.9 ± 22.1	40.0 ± 28.9