## 6 Results and Discussion
### Similarity of an Auspicious Pattern between Any Two Surveyed Artists
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Orientation** & **Artist** & **[PERSON], [PERSON]** & **[PERSON], [PERSON]** & **[PERSON], [PERSON]** & **[PERSON], [PERSON]** & **[PERSON],** & **[PERSON], [PERSON]** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{\(0^{\circ}\)} & [PERSON], [PERSON] & [1,0,1,1,1,0,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,1,0] & [1,1,1,1,1,1,0] & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,1,0] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON] & & & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [1,1,1,1,1,1,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] & [1,0,1,1,1,0,1] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON] & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,1,0] & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON] & & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,1,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON] & & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON] & & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,1,1] & [1,1,1,1,1,1] \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{\(45^{\circ}\)} & [PERSON], [PERSON] & [1,0,0,1,0,0,0] & [0,0,0,0,1,0] & [1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1] & [1,0,1,1,1,1,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,1,0] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON] & & & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0] & [1,1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON]-[PERSON] & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON]-[PERSON] & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON]-[PERSON] & & & & & [1,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON]-[PERSON] & & & & & [1,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{\(90^{\circ}\)} & [PERSON], [PERSON]-C. & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,1,0] & [1,1,1,1,1,1,1,0] & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [1,0,0,1,0,1,1] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON]-[PERSON] & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,1,1] & [1,1,1,1,1,1,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] & [0,1,1,0,1,0] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON] & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,1,0] & [1,1,1,1,1,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,1,1] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON]-[PERSON] & & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,1,1] & [1,1,1,1,1,1] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON]-N. & & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,1,0] \\  & [PERSON], [PERSON]-[PERSON] & & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,1,0] \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{\(135^{\circ}\)} & [PERSON], [PERSON]-C. & [1,0,0,1,0,0] & [0,0,0,0,0,0] & [1,1,1,1,1,1,1] & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\  & [PERSON], T.-F. & & & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] & [1,1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\  & [PERSON], Y.-C. & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\  & [PERSON], L.-S. & & & & & [1,1,1,1,1,0,1] & [1,1,1,1,0,1] \\  & [PERSON], W.-N. & & & & & [1,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\  & [PERSON], S.-Y. & & & & & & [1,0,0,0,0,0,0] \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* Confidence level \(\alpha\): 0.1. The elements in a vector of [] indicate the hypotheses supported based on the co-occurrence features of ASM, CON, HOM, ENT, DIS, COR, and CLU, in sequence, and “0” and “1” denote H\({}_{0}\) and H\({}_{1}\), respectively.  
\end{table} 
Table 4: Two-tailed \(t\)-test results for similarity between any two surveyed artists’ lock chain patterns in the orientations. reasonable demonstrations of master and apprentice relationships between them and the other artists. For the lock chain pattern, except for COR, the other co-occurrence features have approximate applicability to demonstrate the master and apprentice relationships. Furthermore, among the surveyed artists in Table 4, [PERSON] shows the fewest reasonable demonstrations of master and apprentice relationships between him and the other artists. Consequently, in this paper the three artists [PERSON], [PERSON], and [PERSON] were excluded from the following two-tailed \(t\)-test to observe the similarity of the fish scales and lock chain patterns between the surveyed and unknown artists. Moreover, ASM, HOM, ENT, and DIS were considered in the two-tailed \(t\)-test based on the fish scales pattern, and in addition to the four above co-occurrence features, CON and CLU were considered in the test based on the lock chain pattern.