## 5 Experiments
### Experiment 4: Static Splitting Factors with Stopping Criteria
#### 5.4.2 Replica Nodes Criterion  
Based on the derived results, it can be said that when applying a stopping criterion of 1000 replica nodes, low-to-medium splitting factors outperform the high ones. Furthermore, as with the time criterion experiment, as the pollution factor increases, the success rates of our scheme are dropping. Additionally, we observed that high partitioning factors lead to substantial improvements in time and resource efficiency. However, this comes at the cost of significant sacrifices in terms of benign connections. It is also noteworthy that considering a low pollution factor of 1%, regardless of the partition factor, our scheme leads to a complete solution. In this context, the results for pollution factors of 5% and 10% are illustrated in Figure 11 and detailed in Tables 11 and 12, respectively. Figure 11: Comparison of the efficiency of the proposed scheme when considering various splitting steps. The pollution factors considered are 5% (**top**) and 10% (**bottom**). This case considers a resource criterion set to 1000 replica nodes. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Num. of** \\ **connections** \\ \end{tabular} & **SF = 2** & **SF = 4** & **SF = 6** & **SF = 8** & **SF = 10** & **SF = 12** & **SF = 14** & **SF = 16** & **SF = 18** & **SF = 20** \\ \hline \(1000\) & & & & & & & & & & \\ \(2000\) & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \(3000\) & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \(4000\) & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \(5000\) & & & & & & & & & & 48.86 & 14.94 \\ \(6000\) & & & & & & & & & 44.88 & 50.86 & 14.98 \\ \(7000\) & & & & & & & & & 44.88 & 51.53 & 15.88 \\ \(8000\) & & & & & & & & & & \\ \(9000\) & \(20.48\) & \(19.23\) & \(21.03\) & \(22.95\) & \(16.99\) & \(28.65\) & \(35.62\) & \(47.68\) & \(51.66\) & \(25.54\) \\ \(10\),\(000\) & \(21.88\) & \(19.99\) & \(21.13\) & \(23.15\) & \(17.13\) & \(28.95\) & \(39.77\) & \(48.59\) & \(51.80\) & \(27.12\) \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}{c} **Num. of** \\ **connections** \\ \end{tabular} & **SF = 2** & **SF = 4** & **SF = 6** & **SF = 8** & **SF = 10** & **SF = 12** & **SF = 14** & **SF = 16** & **SF = 18** & **SF = 20** \\ \hline \(1000\) & & & & & & & & & \\ \(2000\) & & & & & & & & & \\ \(3000\) & & & & & & & & & \\ \(4000\) & & & & & & & & & \\ \(5000\) & & & & & & & & & 90.2 & 81.2 \\ \(7000\) & & & & & & & & & 91.4 & 88.2 & 80.5 \\ \(8000\) & & & & & & & & & & \\ \(9000\) & \(94.8\) & \(94.1\) & \(89.3\) & \(92\) & \(94.9\) & \(91.2\) & \(88.5\) & \(89.2\) & \(88.6\) & \(80\) \\ \(10\),\(000\) & \(94.7\) & \(93.8\) & \(88.3\) & \(91.2\) & \(94.9\) & \(88\) & \(88\) & \(87.2\) & \(86.1\) & \(79.5\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 11: Time elapsed in minutes (top) and detection rate (bottom) when considering a pollution factor of 5%. Highlighted are the best (green) and worst (red) configurations. Note that empty cells indicate that all benign connections (95% of all connections) were saved. Particularly, as seen from Figure 11 and Table 11, in the case of a pollution factor of 5%, our scheme achieves an optimal solution for every splitting factor for connection pools up to 5K. Furthermore, within the range of low-to-medium partitioning factors, spanning from 2 to 14, complete solutions are also achieved for connection pools of 6K and 7K. Additionally, a partitioning factor of 2 also yields such a solution for connection pools of 8K. Last, for large connection pools of 9K and 10K, the best performer is the splitting factor of 10; it takes roughly 17 min and has 94.9% of success for both these pools. This translates as follows. For both the connection pools of 9K and 10K, only 0.1% of the benign connections are sacrificed, while 1.87 and 2.78 fewer min are spent and 202 and 364 fewer nodes are spawned compared to the brute force experiment of Section 5.2. Conversely, the splitting factor of 20 exhibits the poorest performance, preserving only 80% and 79.5% of benign connections. Nevertheless, it consumes notably 64.74 and 70.8 min less, also generating 653 and 953 fewer nodes.