With a maximum possible completeness score of thirteen, most practitioners voted together on placing more on the problem list than less.
When the 7 cases with an unknown source are considered, this finding suggests that at least 13 cases were not reported (maximum reporting completeness 88%).
This comparison shows that the maximum difference in completeness, correctness, and quality values is around 1% with noiseless values.
From their measures, the maximum value of completeness is 92% and correctness is 98%, which is lesser than the proposed work maximum values shown in Table 3.
Jiuxiang et al. [1] proposed road network detection, and their work is evaluated on five images and performance measures are tabulated; from that work, minimum and maximum values of completeness, correctness, and quality are taken and average values are calculated.
When responses to emotional faces were contrasted with rest in all subjects, right-sided maxima were observed in the pre-specified ROIs: V1 (18, −95, 0), FG (42, −60, −15), amygdala (25, −4, −15), and OFC (28, 32, −15) (Table 2) (note: left hemisphere maxima also reported for completeness).
We reached maximum correctness with an acceptable completeness in tracking by setting this score threshold to a value of 0.9.
Thus for comparison with other works, minimum, maximum and average values for completeness, correctness and quality are considered.
The X-axis is divided into three portions: first portion shows the minimum, maximum, and average values of completeness; second portion shows the minimum, maximum, and average values of correctness; and third portion shows the minimum, maximum, and average values of quality values.
We computed the cutoff values of the completeness analysis as maximum hmmsearch bit scores between the HMMER profiles and proteins from any transcripts of the eight species instead of the proteins from the representative transcripts of the genes.
