Comparative Analysis of the Performance of Complex Texture Clustering Driven by Computational Intelligence Methods Using Multiple Clustering Models

Table 2

Comparative analysis for Rand Index (RI).

Images	Size	Cluster	FCM	FSC	GMM	MEC	Kmeans	Mean-shift
T21	100 × 100	2	0.92	0.95	0.97	0.96	0.96	0.76
T22	100 × 100	2	0.74	0.73	0.91	0.74	0.91	0.84
T31	100 × 100	3	0.84	0.88	0.91	0.81	0.78	0.80
T32	100 × 100	3	0.79	0.91	0.92	0.84	0.93	0.85
T41	100 × 100	4	0.61	0.91	0.92	0.79	0.91	0.88
D1	124 × 124	7	0.66	0.72	0.76	0.62	0.76	0.71
Z2	100 × 100	5	0.71	0.75	0.85	0.66	0.74	0.80
Z3	100 × 100	2	0.72	0.72	0.74	0.72	0.70	0.70
Z4	100 × 100	2	0.76	0.73	0.77	0.80	0.81	0.59
Z5	100 × 100	2	0.90	0.91	0.87	0.91	0.94	0.93