Table 2.

Quantitative results corresponding to image segmentation when the synthesized data is used for data augmentation. For each experiments, the first row reports the percentage of synthesized/real data for training and the number of instances of synthesized/real data in parentheses. Exp. 4 reports the results of ablation study.

	Dice score			Hausdorff95 distance			Sensitivity			Specificity
	Edema	Cavity	Tumor	Edema	Cavity	Tumor	Edema	Cavity	Tumor	Edema	Cavity	Tumor
Exp.1: 50% Synthesized + 50% Real (1080 + 1080)
pix2pix [7]	0.589	0.459	0.562	13.180	21.003	10.139	0.626	0.419	0.567	0.995	0.998	0.999
pix2pix HD [14]	0.599	0.527	0.571	17.406	8.606	10.369	0.630	0.494	0.570	0.996	0.998	0.999
Shin et al. [11]	0.731	0.688	0.772	7.306	6.290	6.294	0.701	0.662	0.785	0.997	0.999	0.999
Our	0.794	0.813	0.821	6.049	1.568	2.293	0.789	0.807	0.841	0.997	0.999	0.999
Exp.2: 25% Synthesized + 75% Real (540 + 1080)
pix2pix [7]	0.602	0.502	0.569	10.706	9.431	10.147	0.640	0.463	0.579	0.995	0.999	0.998
pix2pix HD [14]	0.634	0.514	0.663	17.754	9.512	9.061	0.670	0.472	0.671	0.996	0.999	0.999
Shin et al. [11]	0.673	0.643	0.708	14.835	7.798	6.688	0.664	0.602	0.733	0.997	0.999	0.998
Our	0.745	0.780	0.772	8.779	6.757	4.735	0.760	0.788	0.805	0.997	0.999	0.999
Exp.3: 0% Synthesized + 100% Real (0 + 1080)
Baseline	0.646	0.613	0.673	8.816	7.856	7.078	0.661	0.576	0.687	0.996	0.999	0.998
Exp.4: Ablation study
w/o Stretch-out	0.684	0.713	0.705	6.592	5.059	4.002	0.708	0.699	0.719	0.997	0.999	0.999
w/o Label-wise D	0.753	0.797	0.785	7.844	2.570	2.719	0.735	0.780	0.783	0.998	0.999	0.999
w/o Atlas	0.677	0.697	0.679	13.909	11.481	7.123	0.691	0.689	0.723	0.997	0.999	0.998
w/o ${\mathcal{L}}_C$	0.728	0.795	0771	8.604	3.024	3.233	0.738	0.777	0.777	0.997	0.999	0.999
Our	0.794	0.813	0.821	6.049	1.568	2.293	0.789	0.807	0.841	0.998	0.999	0.999