## 5 Experiments
### Experiment 4: Static Splitting Factors with Stopping Criteria
#### 5.4.3 Connections Saved Criterion  
Examining the results of this experiment given in Figure 12 and Tables 13-15, we argue that medium splitting factors surpass low and high ones in performance when the stopping criterion is set to at least 80% of connections to be saved. Moreover, from the same Figure, it is apparent that both time and resource requirements are essentially reduced as opposed \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{r r r r r r r r r r} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Num. of** \\ **connections** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SF = 2**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SF = 4**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SF = 6**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SF = 8**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SF = 10**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SF = 12**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SF = 14**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SF = 16**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SF = 18**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SF = 20**} \\ \hline  
000 & 85.4 & 86 & 81.9 & 85.4 & 87.2 & 82.6 & 84.1 & 86.3 & 77.4 & 76.7 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 12: Time elapsed in minutes (top) and detection rate (bottom) when considering a pollution factor of 10%. Highlighted are the best (green) and worst (red) configurations. Note that empty cells indicate that all benign connections (90% of all connections) were saved. to all the previous experiments. Recall that this cutback has been also observed from the experiment of Section 5.3 and Figure 9, where it was corroborated that more than 80% of the connections have been saved in roughly 10 and 4 min for splitting factors of 2 and 10, respectively. Significantly, the execution time of our scheme is bounded by an 18 min barrier. Resource-wise the same low bound holds for pollution factor 1% and 5%, where the most nodes that have been spawned are 638. However, in the case of a 10% pollution factor, high splitting factors still spawn a substantial number of nodes, often exceeding a total of 1000. From this standpoint, as observed from Figure 12 and Table 13, when considering a pollution factor of 1%, medium splitting factors are optimal. Specifically, for connection pools exceeding 5K, a splitting factor of 10 demonstrates optimal performance, requiring approximately 1.5 min to retain 80% of the benign connections, with a maximum expense of 46 nodes. Conversely, employing a splitting factor of 2 takes around 3 min, while a factor of 20 results in the creation of 134 nodes, making these two setups the least efficient in terms of time and resource utilization, respectively. To highlight the reduction  
Figure 12: Comparison of the efficiency of the proposed scheme when considering various splitting steps. The pollution factors considered are 1% **(top)** 5% **(middle)** and 10% **(bottom)**. In this case, we consider a connections saved criterion set to 80%. in time and resource requirements, we focus on the best-performing splitting factor of each experiment and a connection pool size of 10K. Compared to the experiments detailed in Sections 5.2, 5.4.1 and 5.4.2, where the best performer was the splitting factor of 10, our approach needs 8.1 min less and generates 873 fewer nodes, albeit at the expense of sacrificing at most 19% of the benign connections. Recall that the simulation concludes when at least 80% of the 99% benign connections are preserved. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Num.