Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Cluster Sampling Method01:20

Cluster Sampling Method

13.5K
Appropriate sampling methods ensure that samples are drawn without bias and accurately represent the population. Because measuring the entire population in a study is not practical, researchers use samples to represent the population of interest.
To choose a cluster sample, divide the population into clusters (groups) and then randomly select some of the clusters. All the members from these clusters are in the cluster sample. For example, if you randomly sample four departments from your...
13.5K
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups01:20

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups

376
Survival analysis is a cornerstone of medical research, used to evaluate the time until an event of interest occurs, such as death, disease recurrence, or recovery. Unlike standard statistical methods, survival analysis is particularly adept at handling censored data—instances where the event has not occurred for some participants by the end of the study or remains unobserved. To address these unique challenges, specialized techniques like the Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and...
376
Multiple Comparison Tests01:13

Multiple Comparison Tests

4.1K
Multiple comparison test, abbreviated as MCT, is a post hoc analysis generally performed after comparing multiple samples with one or more tests. An MCT will help identify a significantly different sample among multiple samples or a factor among multiple factors.
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
4.1K
Evolutionary Relationships through Genome Comparisons02:54

Evolutionary Relationships through Genome Comparisons

6.5K
Genome comparison is one of the excellent ways to interpret the evolutionary relationships between organisms. The basic principle of genome comparison is that if two species share a common feature, it is likely encoded by the DNA sequence conserved between both species. The advent of genome sequencing technologies in the late 20th century enabled scientists to understand the concept of conservation of domains between species and helped them to deduce evolutionary relationships across diverse...
6.5K
One-Way ANOVA: Unequal Sample Sizes01:15

One-Way ANOVA: Unequal Sample Sizes

6.1K
One-way ANOVA can be performed on three or more samples of unequal sizes. However, calculations get complicated when sample sizes are not always the same. So, while performing ANOVA with unequal samples size, the following equation is used:
6.1K
Quantifying and Rejecting Outliers: The Grubbs Test01:02

Quantifying and Rejecting Outliers: The Grubbs Test

2.9K
Sometimes, a data set can have a recorded numerical observation that greatly  deviates from the rest of the data. Assuming that the data is normally distributed, a statistical method called the Grubbs test can be used to determine whether the observation is truly an outlier.  To perform a two-tailed Grubbs test, first, calculate the absolute difference between the outlier and the mean. Then, calculate the ratio between this difference and the standard deviation of the sample. This...
2.9K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Comparison study of population-based methods for non-invasive fetal electrocardiography extraction.

Frontiers in medicine·2026
Same author

Video-based hand gesture recognition via SPD manifold spatial representation and optical flow motion features.

PloS one·2026
Same author

Optimizing image watermarking integrity and visual quality via DTPSO and hybrid transform methods.

Scientific reports·2026
Same author

Evaluating No-Code and Low-Code Platforms for Medical Image Classification: A Systematic Review.

Journal of imaging informatics in medicine·2026
Same author

GFTrans: an on-the-fly static analysis framework for code performance profiling.

Frontiers in big data·2026
Same author

An enhanced neural network algorithm and its applications for numerical optimization and parameter extraction of photovoltaic models.

Scientific reports·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Nov 5, 2025

Large-scale Reconstructions and Independent, Unbiased Clustering Based on Morphological Metrics to Classify Neurons in Selective Populations
12:27

Large-scale Reconstructions and Independent, Unbiased Clustering Based on Morphological Metrics to Classify Neurons in Selective Populations

Published on: February 15, 2017

7.1K

Performance evaluation results of evolutionary clustering algorithm star for clustering heterogeneous datasets.

Bryar A Hassan1,2, Tarik A Rashid3, Seyedali Mirjalili4,5

  • 1Kurdistan Institution for Strategic Studies and Scientific Research, Sulaimani, Iraq.

Data in Brief
|May 13, 2021
PubMed
Summary

The evolutionary clustering algorithm star (ECA*) outperforms other algorithms in identifying the correct number of clusters and is less sensitive to dataset features. However, ECA* has limitations regarding prior knowledge assumptions and real-world application.

Keywords:
ECA* performance evaluationECA* performance ranking frameworkECA* statistical performance evaluationEvolutionary clustering algorithm star

More Related Videos

Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances
07:35

Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances

Published on: October 11, 2018

7.8K
ExCYT: A Graphical User Interface for Streamlining Analysis of High-Dimensional Cytometry Data
05:12

ExCYT: A Graphical User Interface for Streamlining Analysis of High-Dimensional Cytometry Data

Published on: January 16, 2019

11.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Nov 5, 2025

Large-scale Reconstructions and Independent, Unbiased Clustering Based on Morphological Metrics to Classify Neurons in Selective Populations
12:27

Large-scale Reconstructions and Independent, Unbiased Clustering Based on Morphological Metrics to Classify Neurons in Selective Populations

Published on: February 15, 2017

7.1K
Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances
07:35

Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances

Published on: October 11, 2018

7.8K
ExCYT: A Graphical User Interface for Streamlining Analysis of High-Dimensional Cytometry Data
05:12

ExCYT: A Graphical User Interface for Streamlining Analysis of High-Dimensional Cytometry Data

Published on: January 16, 2019

11.6K

Area of Science:

  • Computer Science
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Data Mining

Background:

  • Clustering algorithms are essential for data analysis, but their performance varies across different datasets.
  • Evaluating and comparing clustering algorithms is crucial for selecting the most effective methods for specific tasks.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the performance of the evolutionary clustering algorithm star (ECA*) against traditional and modern clustering algorithms.
  • To assess the sensitivity of ECA* and other algorithms to various dataset features.

Main Methods:

  • ECA* was compared with GENCLUST++, LVQ, EM, K-means++, and K-means on 32 heterogeneous datasets.
  • Performance was evaluated using objective function and cluster quality measures.
  • A performance rating framework assessed sensitivity to cluster dimensionality, number of clusters, overlap, shape, and structure.

Main Results:

  • ECA* demonstrated superior ability in determining the correct number of clusters compared to other algorithms.
  • ECA* exhibited lower sensitivity to dataset features than its counterparts.
  • Limitations include the assumption of no prior knowledge and limited real-world application.

Conclusions:

  • ECA* shows promise as a robust clustering algorithm, particularly in identifying the optimal number of clusters.
  • Further research is needed to address its limitations and explore its applicability in real-world scenarios.