Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2021 Sep 30;40(10):2642–2655. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2021.3054817

TABLE II.

Comparative performances of different methods in terms of seen recall (RES), unseen recall (REU) and harmonic mean of seen and unseen recall (REH) for combination 1 of seen and unseen classes from TABLE I. Bold fonts indicate the best values in each column.

Methods NIH NIH-900 Open-i PMC

ReS ReU ReH ReS ReU ReH ReS ReU ReH ReS ReU ReH
ESZSL(X) 38.14 0.00 0.00 38.63 0.00 0.00 29.34 0.00 0.00 25.71 0.00 0.00
ESZSL(CT) 24.23 1.42 2.68 32.67 0.00 0.00 45.10 0.00 0.00 30.00 0.00 0.00
DeVise(X) 0.00 34.79 0.00 0.00 14.90 0.00 0.00 22.07 0.00 0.00 21.21 0.00
DeVise(CT) 5.49 0.15 0.29 14.33 0.00 0.00 21.23 0.00 0.00 17.14 0.00 0.00
SAE(X) 29.57 8.00 12.59 30.67 9.13 14.08 34.25 10.39 15.94 11.43 9.09 10.13
SAE(CT) 29.17 8.63 13.32 29.67 9.62 14.52 29.45 11.43 16.47 11.43 12.12 11.76
GMN(X) 32.88 6.07 10.24 33.08 3.51 6.34 37.33 5.48 9.56 17.07 11.76 13.93
GMN(CT) 35.07 5.33 9.25 26.26 1.56 2.94 30.48 1.60 3.04 12.20 2.94 4.74
GDAN(X) 34.94 7.27 12.04 27.78 8.97 13.56 35.27 5.94 10.16 26.93 2.94 5.30
GDAN(CT) 32.14 8.95 14.00 29.80 6.24 10.32 31.51 4.57 7.98 31.71 5.88 9.92
Proposed 30.12 19.67 23.80 40.72 45.40 42.93 37.74 41.13 39.36 25.71 30.30 27.82