Research Article
Robust Structure Preserving Nonnegative Matrix Factorization for Dimensionality Reduction
Table 4
Clustering performance on global noise contaminated datasets. The best performances are highlighted in bold font.
(a) |
| Dataset | Accuracy (%) | means | PCA | NMF | GNMF | SPNMF | RSPNMF |
| FERET | 23.76 ± 1.68 | 27.14 ± 1.57 | 26.9 ± 1.23 | 25.76 ± 0.58 | 28.24 ± 0.73 | 35.30 ± 0.81 | ORL | 42.36 ± 3.24 | 52.78 ± 2.48 | 52.76 ± 2.85 | 52.85 ± 0.79 | 53.91 ± 1.78 | 61.5 ± 1.92 | Yale | 36.79 ± 2.24 | 41.21 ± 2.98 | 42.03 ± 2.83 | 40.06 ± 1.43 | 43.64 ± 1.39 | 50.30 ± 1.57 |
|
|
(b) |
| Dataset | Normalized mutual information (%) | means | PCA | NMF | GNMF | SPNMF | RSPNMF |
| FERET | 50.06 ± 2.74 | 58.95 ± 1.02 | 57.94 ± 1.28 | 60.33 ± 0.60 | 62.01 ± 0.57 | 68.65 ± 0.43 | ORL | 60.14 ± 2.77 | 70.33 ± 1.39 | 67.37 ± 1.94 | 66.7 ± 0.80 | 70.99 ± 0.74 | 76.97 ± 0.92 | Yale | 41.68 ± 2.27 | 44.78 ± 2.09 | 46.94 ± 2.37 | 45.94 ± 0.88 | 47.68 ± 1.08 | 54.89 ± 2.08 |
|
|