Table 4 Comparison between DBSCAN and KM-DBSCAN across multiple parameter settings.
Method | \(\varepsilon\) | MinPts | ARI | Time (s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | 2.75 | 399 | 0.91 | 0.0249 |
| Â | 2.76 | 399 | 0.00 | 0.0240 |
| Â | 2.75 | 405 | 0.913 | 0.0229 |
DBSCAN (whole data set = 1500) | 2.77 | 405 | 0 | 0.0269 |
| Â | 2.77 | 406 | 0 | 0.0229 |
| Â | 2.80 | 407 | 0 | 0.0249 |
| Â | 2.80 | 415 | 0.902 | 0.0229 |
| Â | 1.97 | 2 | 0.979 | 0.001 |
| Â | 1.97 | 3 | 0.979 | 0.001 |
| Â | 1.98 | 3 | 0.979 | 0.001 |
KM-DBSCAN (k=50) | 1.98 | 2 | 0.979 | 0.001 |
| Â | 1.99 | 2 | 0.979 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.00 | 4 | 0.979 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.00 | 5 | 0.979 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.30 | 14 | 0.951 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.31 | 14 | 0.955 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.31 | 15 | 0.964 | 0.001 |
KM-DBSCAN (k=100) | 2.33 | 14 | 0.967 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.34 | 14 | 0.967 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.34 | 16 | 0.958 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.35 | 16 | 0.958 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.60 | 36 | 0.940 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.61 | 36 | 0.940 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.62 | 35 | 0.945 | 0.001 |
KM-DBSCAN (k=150) | 2.63 | 35 | 0.945 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.64 | 35 | 0.953 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.64 | 36 | 0.943 | 0.001 |
| Â | 2.63 | 37 | 0.938 | 0.001 |