• Laser & Optoelectronics Progress
  • Vol. 58, Issue 8, 0810006-1 (2021)
Chenwen Wu, Ning Ma*, and Yufan Jiang
Author Affiliations
  • School of Electronics and Information Engineering, Lanzhou Jiaotong University, Lanzhou, Gansu 730070, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/LOP202158.0810006 Cite this Article Set citation alerts
    Chenwen Wu, Ning Ma, Yufan Jiang. Weighted FCM Clustering Algorithm Based on Jeffrey Divergence Similarity Measure[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2021, 58(8): 0810006-1 Copy Citation Text show less
    Convergence analysis of four clustering algorithms. (a) FCM; (b) K-means; (c) DPC; (d) JW-FCM
    Fig. 1. Convergence analysis of four clustering algorithms. (a) FCM; (b) K-means; (c) DPC; (d) JW-FCM
    Clustering results of four clustering algorithms on Spiral data set. (a) FCM; (b) K-means; (c) DPC; (d) JW-FCM
    Fig. 2. Clustering results of four clustering algorithms on Spiral data set. (a) FCM; (b) K-means; (c) DPC; (d) JW-FCM
    Clustering results of four clustering algorithms on S1 data set. (a) FCM; (b) K-means; (c) DPC; (d) JW-FCM
    Fig. 3. Clustering results of four clustering algorithms on S1 data set. (a) FCM; (b) K-means; (c) DPC; (d) JW-FCM
    Clustering results of four clustering algorithms on ISquare2 data set. (a) FCM; (b) K-means; (c) DPC; (d) JW-FCM
    Fig. 4. Clustering results of four clustering algorithms on ISquare2 data set. (a) FCM; (b) K-means; (c) DPC; (d) JW-FCM
    Comparison of ACC indicators
    Fig. 5. Comparison of ACC indicators
    Comparison of ARI indicators
    Fig. 6. Comparison of ARI indicators
    Robustness comparison on Wine data set
    Fig. 7. Robustness comparison on Wine data set
    Robustness comparison on Thyroid data set
    Fig. 8. Robustness comparison on Thyroid data set
    Robustness comparison on D31 data set
    Fig. 9. Robustness comparison on D31 data set
    Robustness comparison on S1 data set
    Fig. 10. Robustness comparison on S1 data set
    Robustness comparison on Isquare2 data set
    Fig. 11. Robustness comparison on Isquare2 data set
    Robustness comparison on Spiral data set
    Fig. 12. Robustness comparison on Spiral data set
    Data setSample numberAttributesNumber of categories
    Wine178133
    Thyroid21553
    D31S1Isquare2Spiral3100500017413122222311563
    Table 1. Experimental data set properties
    Data setACCARIEntropy
    FCMK-meansDPCJW-FCMFCMK-meansDPCJW-FCMFCMK-meansDPCJW-FCM
    Wine0.4080.4560.4410.8980.0070.0060.0120.8540.1500.2500.1600.100
    Thyroid0.6150.6530.5240.7500.1680.1960.0750.6980.6000.7800.4700.420
    D310.8750.3580.8460.9930.6540.3240.7560.8820.3200.3200.2300.180
    S10.6570.6850.8761.0000.5980.6980.8971.0000.7600.8900.7600.630
    Isquare20.9760.7640.9851.0000.9750.7080.9681.0000.0800.2700.1300.060
    Spiral0.3560.4050.5291.0000.0030.0110.2761.0000.9600.9600.6600.460
    Mean0.6480.5540.7000.9400.4010.3240.4970.9060.4780.5780.4020.308
    Table 2. Performance comparison of four clustering algorithms on data set
    Chenwen Wu, Ning Ma, Yufan Jiang. Weighted FCM Clustering Algorithm Based on Jeffrey Divergence Similarity Measure[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2021, 58(8): 0810006-1
    Download Citation