Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Nov 5.
Published in final edited form as: J Mach Learn Res. 2021 Jan;22:55.

Table 4:

Comparisons of adjusted Rand index for high-dimensional mixed multi-view data

Method Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6
Hclust: X1 0.42 (2.3e-2) 0.56 (2.5e-2) 0.43 (2.5e-2) 0.51 (2.7e-2)
Hclust: X2 0.23 (2.8e-2) 0.29 (3.4e-2) 0.51 (2.6e-2) 0.49 (2.1e-2)
Hclust: X3 0.25 (3.1e-2) 0.27 (3.1e-2) 0.55 (2.6e-2) 0.48 (1.9e-2)
Hclust: [X1X2X3] - Euclidean 0.40 (3.7e-2) 0.57 (3.3e-2) 0.55 (2.5e-2) 0.52 (2.1e-2)
Hclust: [X1X2X3] - Gower 0.68 (3.4e-2) 0.58 (6.3e-2) 0.58 (3.2e-2) 0.58 (3.0e-2)
iCluster+ 0.57 (6.5e-2) 0.77 (2.7e-2) 0.61 (2.4e-2) 0.62 (1.6e-2)
Bayesian Consensus Clustering 0.35 (1.1e-1) 0.64 (1.0e-1) 0.59 (1.2e-2) 0.63 (6.6e-3)
iGecco 0.00 (6.7e-4) 0.06 (5.0e-2) 0.39 (4.5e-2) 0.23 (6.9e-2)
iGecco+ 0.12 (3.3e-2) 0.16 (7.1e-2) 0.44 (3.6e-2) 0.39 (3.8e-2)
Adaptive iGecco+ 0.97 (7.8e-3) 0.99 (7.5e-3) 1.00 (0.0e-0) 1.00 (0.0e-0)