deletions | additions       diff --git a/section_Conclusion_and_Recommendation_Based__.tex b/section_Conclusion_and_Recommendation_Based__.tex  index 86011ab..7f8cfbb 100644  --- a/section_Conclusion_and_Recommendation_Based__.tex  +++ b/section_Conclusion_and_Recommendation_Based__.tex 
...
\section{Conclusion and Recommendation}  Based on the criteria described above, a bigger $k$ would give better results since the variance within clusters decreases. Thus, lessening the chances of mixing healthy and infected pixels in the same cluster. However, more clusters would mean additional computational complexity and longer processing times. K-Means alone has a computational complexity of $O(n^{dk+1}\log{}n)$, $O(n^{dk+1}\log{}n)$ \cite{inaba1994applications},  where $d$ refers to the dimensions (2 in this case $a^*$ and $b^*$). This implies that the complexity increases exponentially as the number of clusters increase.