Table 7 Comparison between the 2.5\({\textsc {SbI}}\overline{\text {R}}{\textsc {GT}}\) and 3\({\textsc {SbI}}\overline{\text {R}}{\textsc {GT}}\) algorithms using the DBSIRGT dataset
d | 2.5\({\textsc {SbI}}\overline{\text {R}}{\textsc {GT}}\) | 3\({\textsc {SbI}}\overline{\text {R}}{\textsc {GT}}\) | Small (%) | Small or equal (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Distance (avg.) | Approx. ratio (avg.) | Distance (avg.) | Approx. ratio (avg.) | |||
10 | 11.79 | 1.57 | 12.25 | 1.64 | 32.30 | 53.18 |
20 | 24.97 | 1.68 | 25.57 | 1.72 | 34.77 | 49.58 |
30 | 38.21 | 1.74 | 36.69 | 1.67 | 63.31 | 73.75 |
40 | 50.47 | 1.79 | 45.61 | 1.62 | 89.60 | 93.69 |
50 | 60.46 | 1.81 | 52.65 | 1.58 | 97.69 | 98.75 |
60 | 68.17 | 1.83 | 58.19 | 1.56 | 99.45 | 99.78 |
70 | 74.06 | 1.84 | 62.54 | 1.55 | 99.75 | 99.90 |
80 | 78.68 | 1.85 | 65.96 | 1.55 | 99.93 | 99.96 |
90 | 82.09 | 1.85 | 68.67 | 1.55 | 99.92 | 99.97 |
100 | 84.85 | 1.86 | 70.82 | 1.55 | 99.97 | 100.00 |