Abstract
We seek to quantify both the classification performance and estimation error robustness of the authors' tomographic classifier fusion methodology by contrasting it in field tests and model scenarios with the sum and product classifier fusion methodologies. In particular, we seek to confirm that the tomographic methodology represents a generally optimal strategy across the entire range of problem dimensionalities, and at a sufficient margin to justify the general advocation of its use. Final results indicate, in particular, a near 25% improvement on the next nearest performing combination scheme at the extremity of the tested dimensional range.