A Comparative Study of Efficient Initialization Methods for the K-Means Clustering Algorithm

K-means is undoubtedly the most widely used partitional clustering algorithm. Unfortunately, due to its gradient descent nature, this algorithm is highly sensitive to the initial placement of the cluster centers. Numerous initialization methods have been proposed to address this problem. In this paper, we first present an overview of these methods with an emphasis on their computational efficiency. We then compare eight commonly used linear time complexity initialization methods on a large and diverse collection of data sets using various performance criteria. Finally, we analyze the experimental results using non-parametric statistical tests and provide recommendations for practitioners. We demonstrate that popular initialization methods often perform poorly and that there are in fact strong alternatives to these methods.Comment: 17 pages, 1 figure, 7 table

Linear, Deterministic, and Order-Invariant Initialization Methods for the K-Means Clustering Algorithm

Over the past five decades, k-means has become the clustering algorithm of choice in many application domains primarily due to its simplicity, time/space efficiency, and invariance to the ordering of the data points. Unfortunately, the algorithm's sensitivity to the initial selection of the cluster centers remains to be its most serious drawback. Numerous initialization methods have been proposed to address this drawback. Many of these methods, however, have time complexity superlinear in the number of data points, which makes them impractical for large data sets. On the other hand, linear methods are often random and/or sensitive to the ordering of the data points. These methods are generally unreliable in that the quality of their results is unpredictable. Therefore, it is common practice to perform multiple runs of such methods and take the output of the run that produces the best results. Such a practice, however, greatly increases the computational requirements of the otherwise highly efficient k-means algorithm. In this chapter, we investigate the empirical performance of six linear, deterministic (non-random), and order-invariant k-means initialization methods on a large and diverse collection of data sets from the UCI Machine Learning Repository. The results demonstrate that two relatively unknown hierarchical initialization methods due to Su and Dy outperform the remaining four methods with respect to two objective effectiveness criteria. In addition, a recent method due to Erisoglu et al. performs surprisingly poorly.Comment: 21 pages, 2 figures, 5 tables, Partitional Clustering Algorithms (Springer, 2014). arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1304.7465, arXiv:1209.196

Latent Class Model with Application to Speaker Diarization

In this paper, we apply a latent class model (LCM) to the task of speaker diarization. LCM is similar to Patrick Kenny's variational Bayes (VB) method in that it uses soft information and avoids premature hard decisions in its iterations. In contrast to the VB method, which is based on a generative model, LCM provides a framework allowing both generative and discriminative models. The discriminative property is realized through the use of i-vector (Ivec), probabilistic linear discriminative analysis (PLDA), and a support vector machine (SVM) in this work. Systems denoted as LCM-Ivec-PLDA, LCM-Ivec-SVM, and LCM-Ivec-Hybrid are introduced. In addition, three further improvements are applied to enhance its performance. 1) Adding neighbor windows to extract more speaker information for each short segment. 2) Using a hidden Markov model to avoid frequent speaker change points. 3) Using an agglomerative hierarchical cluster to do initialization and present hard and soft priors, in order to overcome the problem of initial sensitivity. Experiments on the National Institute of Standards and Technology Rich Transcription 2009 speaker diarization database, under the condition of a single distant microphone, show that the diarization error rate (DER) of the proposed methods has substantial relative improvements compared with mainstream systems. Compared to the VB method, the relative improvements of LCM-Ivec-PLDA, LCM-Ivec-SVM, and LCM-Ivec-Hybrid systems are 23.5%, 27.1%, and 43.0%, respectively. Experiments on our collected database, CALLHOME97, CALLHOME00 and SRE08 short2-summed trial conditions also show that the proposed LCM-Ivec-Hybrid system has the best overall performance