Table 3 Comparison with other... | Emerald Publishing

Table 3

Comparison with other approaches. (**Experiment might have been performed in different images of the same dataset, N/A means data was not reported and all values are reported in ‘%’).

Methods	Completeness	Correctness	Quality	F1-score
Maurya et al. [36]	82.3 ± 4.7	70.5 ± 4.3	61.2 ± 6.1	N/A
Sujatha and Selvathi [55]	83.5 ± 4.3	76.6 ± 4.5	66.5 ± 6.4	N/A
Alshehhi and Marpu [2]	92.5 ± 3.2	91.0 ± 3.0	84.7 ± 5.4	N/A
**Panboonyuen et al. [45]	89.4	85.8	N/A	87.6
**Saito et al. [50]	92.9	90.1	N/A	N/A
Proposed-Method	93.4 ± 4.1	85.9 ± 2.9	82.2 ± 3.4	90.2 ± 3.1

Methods	Completeness	Correctness	Quality	F1-score
Maurya et al. [36]	82.3 ± 4.7	70.5 ± 4.3	61.2 ± 6.1	N/A
Sujatha and Selvathi [55]	83.5 ± 4.3	76.6 ± 4.5	66.5 ± 6.4	N/A
Alshehhi and Marpu [2]	92.5 ± 3.2	91.0 ± 3.0	84.7 ± 5.4	N/A
**Panboonyuen et al. [45]	89.4	85.8	N/A	87.6
**Saito et al. [50]	92.9	90.1	N/A	N/A
Proposed-Method	93.4 ± 4.1	85.9 ± 2.9	82.2 ± 3.4	90.2 ± 3.1