Skip to main content

Table 4 Performance comparison between CytoSpectre (CS) and FibrilTool (FT) using synthetic images of intracellular fibrils

From: CytoSpectre: a tool for spectral analysis of oriented structures on cellular and subcellular levels

  CS orientation, error mean ± std (deg) FT orientation, error mean ± std (deg) Wilcoxon signed rank test p-value CS circular variance, Pearson’s r FT isotropy index, Pearson’s r
Non-degraded 2.6261 ± 10.482 29.673 ± 39.693 5.6773E-12 0.54506 0.19542
Blurred 3.2969 ± 10.063 56.685 ± 38.136 2.6288E-22 0.15807 0.10137
Gaussian noise 2.2876 ± 10.11 15.785 ± 25.552 3.7340E-19 0.45714 0.2711
Poisson noise 3.7733 ± 13.852 19.829 ± 28.444 1.9903E-16 0.49203 0.22492
  1. Absolute errors in degrees (mean ± standard deviation) between true mean orientation values and values estimated by CS and FT are shown for images of the fibril dataset (N = 100) without degradations, with moderate blurring (kernel std 2.5 pixels), with moderate Gaussian noise (var. 1 %) and with moderate Poisson noise (level 10). Paired, two-sided Wilcoxon signed rank tests were performed to compare the orientation errors of CS and FT and the resulting p-values are given for each case. Pearson’s linear correlation coefficients between true and estimated measures of isotropy are also shown for the corresponding cases