Table 3.

Quantitative evaluation of the soft‐tissue and bone prediction images of our ASOFS NNC scheme, in terms of SSIM and PSNR, for two different folds in the two‐fold CV. DE images from our DE database were used as a reference. The statistical analysis (paired two‐tailed t‐test; a significance level of 0.05) between the results obtained for different folds showed no statistically significant differences, showing the robustness of our scheme against different training and test images

	Trained on fold 1 Tested on fold 2	Trained on fold 2 Tested on fold 1
Bone image comparison
SSIM	0.798 ± 0.032	0.797 ± 0.036
PSNR	23.87 ± 1.95	23.37 ± 2.20
Soft‐tissue image comparison
SSIM	0.910 ± 0.032	0.914 ± 0.018
PSNR	29.66 ± 1.60	29.98 ± 1.37

SSIM, structural similarity index; PSNR, peak signal‐to‐noise ratio.