In LGE CMR of the LV, hyper-enhanced areas not relating to scar are not uncommon (Turkbey et al., 2012). Unless the characteristic and geometry of these pseudo infarcts are explicitly modelled into the technique, it is challenging for an algorithm to distinguish them. Some common sources of pseudo infarcts seen in LGE CMR of the LV are: (1) the location of the RV insertion point, (2) partial voluming in basal slices due to the outflow tract and the appendage, and (3) hyper-enhanced areas due to epiand pericardial fat. An experienced observer selected regions containing the aforementioned enhancements. These were identified using simple techniques such as checking for continuity of scar or artefact in the adjacent slices, i.e. if it continues then it is likely to be scar. Some instances of pseudo infarcts occurring in the patient dataset are shown in Fig. 2. To evaluate how the algorithms handled pseudo infarcts, each algorithm’s output was evaluated separately on these regions. The percentage of voxels detected by each method in these spurious regions was determined.