1. The article proposes a new dissimilarity index for measuring time series proximity, which takes into account both the closeness of values and the similarity in terms of growth behavior.
2. A comparative numerical analysis is performed between the proposed index and classical distance measures on two datasets: a synthetic dataset and a dataset from a public health study.
3. The article references 884 Accesses, 78 Citations, and 3 Altmetric metrics to support its findings.
The article appears to be reliable and trustworthy as it provides evidence to support its claims through numerical analysis on two datasets, referencing 884 Accesses, 78 Citations, and 3 Altmetric metrics. Furthermore, the article references several other sources to back up its findings such as Alt H & Godau M (1992), Caiado J et al (2006), Chouakria Douzal A (2003), Eiter T & Mannila H (1994), Garcia-Escudero LA & Gordaliza A (2005), Godau M (1991), Heckman NE & Zamar RH (2000), Hennig C & Hausdorf B (2006), Kakizawa Y et al (1998), Kaslow RA & Ostrow DG (1987) and Keller K & Wittfeld K (2004).
The only potential bias that could be identified in this article is that it does not present both sides equally; however, this is not necessarily an issue since the purpose of the article is to propose a new dissimilarity index for measuring time series proximity rather than presenting both sides of an argument.