Similarity values obtained by G-SESAME
| | CAR1 | CAR2 | PRO3 | PUT1 | PUT2 |
| CAR1 | | 0.140 | 0.140 | 0.165 | 0.140 |
| CAR2 | | | 0.199 | 0.235 | 0.199 |
| PRO3 | | | | 0.602 | 0.728 |
| PUT1 | | | | | 0.602 |
| PUT2 | | | | | |
Clustering results obtained by G-SESAME
| Threshold | Initial | 0.720 | 0.600 | 0.230 | 0.160 |
Clustering
Result |
|
|
|
|
|
Similarity values obtained by Resnik's method
| | CAR1 | CAR2 | PRO3 | PUT1 | PUT2 |
| CAR1 | | 0.140 | 0.140 | 0.140 | 0.140 |
| CAR2 | | | 0.281 | 0.281 | 0.281 |
| PRO3 | | | | 3.163 | 6.536 |
| PUT1 | | | | | 3.163 |
| PUT2 | | | | | |
Clustering results obtained by Resnik's method
| Threshold | Initial | 6.537 | 3.137 | 0.237 | 0.137 |
Clustering
Result |
|
|
|
|
|
Analysis:
The similarity values and clustering results obtained by Resnik's method are very similar to those obtained by G-SESAME.
Conclusion:
Both methods are equal.