Table 4: Percentage of resonant asteroids in the local background identified as family members by the classical method (CHCM), the ``standard'' frequency method (FHCM), and the new distance metrics introduced in this article (AHCM).
Family name Resonant argument CHCM FHCM AHCM

Erigone $2{\nu}_6+{\nu}_{16}$ 1.5 2.2 3.3

Elektra $3{\nu}_6+{\nu}_{16}$ 2.2 4.8 7.8

Phocaea ${\nu}_6-{\nu}_{16}$ 34.4 34.4 47.7

Baptistina ${\nu}_{17}+{\nu}_4+{\nu}_5-2{\nu}_6$ 1.2 N/A 5.2

Vesta $3{\nu}_{16}-{\nu}_{17}$ 12.9 13.1 22.7

Vesta $3{\nu }_6-{\nu }_5$ 3.6 1.9 5.7

Vesta $2{\nu }_6-{\nu }_5$ 0.0 0.0 0.2

**Table 4:** Percentage of resonant asteroids in the local background identified as family members by the classical method (CHCM), the ``standard'' frequency method (FHCM), and the new distance metrics introduced in this article (AHCM).
Family name	Resonant argument	CHCM	FHCM	AHCM
Erigone	$2{\nu}_6+{\nu}_{16}$	1.5	2.2	3.3
Elektra	$3{\nu}_6+{\nu}_{16}$	2.2	4.8	7.8
Phocaea	${\nu}_6-{\nu}_{16}$	34.4	34.4	47.7
Baptistina	${\nu}_{17}+{\nu}_4+{\nu}_5-2{\nu}_6$	1.2	N/A	5.2
Vesta	$3{\nu}_{16}-{\nu}_{17}$	12.9	13.1	22.7
Vesta	$3{\nu }_6-{\nu }_5$	3.6	1.9	5.7
Vesta	$2{\nu }_6-{\nu }_5$	0.0	0.0	0.2

Source LaTeX | All tables | In the text