Lesion segmentation in breast ultrasound images using the optimized marked watershed method

Table 5 Comparison of the quantitative results of rdaunet and AMSMW on the test set of dataset A. fold0, fold1, fold2, fold3 and fold4 are the five test sets in the five-fold cross-validation experiment

		\( {Loss\, (\%)}\)	\( {Acc\, (\%)}\)	\( {DC\, (\%)}\)	\( {Sen\, (\%)}\)	\( {Sp \,(\%)}\)	\( {F1 \,(\%)}\)	\( {Pc \,(\%)}\)	\( {M-IOU \,(\%)}\)
fold0	RDAU	28.22	96.44	71.78	75.43	98.52	74.00	77.96	61.15
fold0	AMSMW	14.55	97.33	85.45	93.64	97.41	85.45	79.89	75.36
fold1	RDAU	25.93	97.17	74.07	73.41	99.07	75.58	83.93	63.65
fold1	AMSMW	14.55	97.26	84.86	92.60	97.33	84.86	79.72	74.42
fold2	RDAU	23.53	96.80	76.49	73.62	99.20	76.47	87.83	66.21
fold2	AMSMW	13.92	97.34	86.08	93.33	97.40	86.08	81.14	76.23
fold3	RDAU	30.57	96.66	69.43	71.52	98.80	69.43	78.85	59.61
fold3	AMSMW	15.15	97.37	84.85	93.21	97.43	84.85	79.66	74.55
fold4	RDAU	23.50	97.14	76.50	78.32	98.77	77.27	80.92	66.23
fold4	AMSMW	15.46	97.35	84.54	92.95	97.55	84.54	79.24	74.20
Average	RDAU	26.35	96.84	73.66	74.46	\(\mathbf{98.87} \)	74.55	\(\mathbf{81.90} \)	63.37
Average	AMSMW	\(\mathbf{14.73} \)	\(\mathbf{97.33} \)	\(\mathbf{85.16} \)	93.15	\(\mathbf{97.42} \)	\(\mathbf{85.16} \)	79.93	\(\mathbf{74.95} \)

ISSN: 1475-925X