## 6 Experimental Data Results and Analysis
### Experimental Performance Metrics Analysis  
(1) Successful Reconfiguration Rate (SRR)  
Figure 6 shows the comparison results of three topology reconfiguration algorithms for different network sizes with one column of redundant cores. It can be seen from the figure that as the number of faulty cores increases and the network core size increases, the overall trend of the topology reconfiguration success rate for these three algorithms is similar. Specifically, when the number of faulty cores is less than 50% of the maximum number of redundant cores, the success rate of topology reconfiguration can reach almost 100%. However, when the number of faulty cores exceeds half of the maximum number of redundant cores, the success rate of topology reconfiguration declines significantly. Nevertheless, as the number of cores and the network size increase, the topology reconfiguration success rate of our proposed adaptive topology reconfiguration algorithm is significantly better than the other two algorithms. In particular, when the number of faulty cores is less than 68.75% of the maximum number of redundant cores, the success rate of topology reconfiguration with our algorithm can reach almost 96.70%. Furthermore, our algorithm demonstrates excellent performance in terms of a successful reconfiguration rate in large-scale networks. For example, when the faulty cores reach 8 in the \(8\times 9\) REmesh, the topology reconfiguration success rate of our algorithm is 63.60%, which is 14.80% higher than BTR and 9.30% higher than BSTR; when the faulty cores reach 12 in the \(12\times 13\) REmesh, the topology reconfiguration success rate of our algorithm is 39.30%, which is 14.30% higher than BTR and 6.10% higher than BSTR. In particular, the successful reconfiguration rate increases with the proportion of faulty cores. Figure 7 shows the comparison results of the average success rate of topology reconfiguration for three topology reconfiguration algorithms. As can be seen from the figure, the average success rate of topology reconfiguration of our algorithm is higher than the other two algorithms, particularly at network core sizes of 4 and 8. For example, when the working core size is \(4\times 4\), our algorithm is 4.05% higher than BSTR, and when the working core size is \(8\times 8\), our algorithm is 2.32% higher than BTR. Therefore, combining the graphs and data, it is concluded that the adaptive core distribution optimization algorithm can significantly improve the topology reconfiguration success rate. Core Reuse Rate (CRR)  
Figure 8 shows the comparison results of the core reuse rate of three topology reconfiguration algorithms. As can be seen from the figure, the core reuse rate of all three algorithms exceeds 95%, indicating a high core reuse rate. Meanwhile, as the network core size increases, the core reuse rate of all three algorithms remains around 97%, with minimal differences observed. However, in a comprehensive view, the overall core reuse rate of our algorithm is still better than the other two algorithms. In particular, when the working core size is \(4\times 4\), the core reuse rate of our algorithm is 100%, which is equal to BSTR, 1.56% higher than BSTR. Figure 6: Successful reconfiguration rate of BTTR, BSTR, and ACTR in different sizes of topology networks when the number of faulty cores reaches maximum (**a**) core scale of work \(4\times 5\), (**b**) core scale of work \(8\times 9\), (**c**) core scale of work \(12\times 13\), and (**d**) core scale of work \(16\times 17\). Figure 7: Average successful reconfiguration rate of BTTR, BSTR, and ACTR in different sizes of topology networks. (3) Average Recovery Time (ART)  
Figure 9 shows the comparison results of the normalized average recovery time of three topology reconfiguration algorithms. As illustrated in the figure, the normalized average recovery time of BUTR is set to 1.00, since the average recovery time for BUTR is significantly longer compared to the other algorithms, resulting in a notably higher running time for the procedure.