Example dataset for Tracking Metrics using TrackMate and Oneat

In this dataset we compare the automated tracking results using the standard TrackMate algorithms for frame to frame and segment to segment linking with the ground truth dataset. Furthermore we use Oneat to correct the branches of the lineage trees and using oneat as TrackCorrector we recompute the metrics to show improvements over TrackMate track linking algorithms.

Tracking Metrics

Simple LAP tracker + Oneat

{DET : 0.9964, CT : 0.73531, TRA : 0.9933, TF : 0.97518, BCi : 0.10526}

LAP Tracker with track splitting and Quality as additional cost

{DET : 0.9900, CT : 0.677033, TRA : 0.986785; TF : 0.95041, BCi : 0.04347}

LAP Tracker with track splitting and Quality as additional cost + Oneat

{DET : 0.98911, CT : 0.672629, TRA : 0.985774, TF : 0.948692, BCi : 0.05555}

LAP Tracker without track splitting and Quality as additional cost + Oneat

{DET : 0.990083, CT : 0.6766, TRA : 0.986742, TF : 0.9521, BCi 0.054}