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
Back to article page

BMC Bioinformatics

ISSN: 1471-2105

Contact us