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

How Many Dissimilarity/Kernel Self Organizing Map Variants Do We Need?

In numerous applicative contexts, data are too rich and too complex to be represented by numerical vectors. A general approach to extend machine learning and data mining techniques to such data is to really on a dissimilarity or on a kernel that measures how different or similar two objects are. This approach has been used to define several variants of the Self Organizing Map (SOM). This paper reviews those variants in using a common set of notations in order to outline differences and similarities between them. It discusses the advantages and drawbacks of the variants, as well as the actual relevance of the dissimilarity/kernel SOM for practical applications

Robust EM algorithm for model-based curve clustering

Model-based clustering approaches concern the paradigm of exploratory data analysis relying on the finite mixture model to automatically find a latent structure governing observed data. They are one of the most popular and successful approaches in cluster analysis. The mixture density estimation is generally performed by maximizing the observed-data log-likelihood by using the expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm. However, it is well-known that the EM algorithm initialization is crucial. In addition, the standard EM algorithm requires the number of clusters to be known a priori. Some solutions have been provided in [31, 12] for model-based clustering with Gaussian mixture models for multivariate data. In this paper we focus on model-based curve clustering approaches, when the data are curves rather than vectorial data, based on regression mixtures. We propose a new robust EM algorithm for clustering curves. We extend the model-based clustering approach presented in [31] for Gaussian mixture models, to the case of curve clustering by regression mixtures, including polynomial regression mixtures as well as spline or B-spline regressions mixtures. Our approach both handles the problem of initialization and the one of choosing the optimal number of clusters as the EM learning proceeds, rather than in a two-fold scheme. This is achieved by optimizing a penalized log-likelihood criterion. A simulation study confirms the potential benefit of the proposed algorithm in terms of robustness regarding initialization and funding the actual number of clusters.Comment: In Proceedings of the 2013 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), 2013, Dallas, TX, US

SMART: Unique splitting-while-merging framework for gene clustering

Copyright @ 2014 Fa et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.Successful clustering algorithms are highly dependent on parameter settings. The clustering performance degrades significantly unless parameters are properly set, and yet, it is difficult to set these parameters a priori. To address this issue, in this paper, we propose a unique splitting-while-merging clustering framework, named “splitting merging awareness tactics” (SMART), which does not require any a priori knowledge of either the number of clusters or even the possible range of this number. Unlike existing self-splitting algorithms, which over-cluster the dataset to a large number of clusters and then merge some similar clusters, our framework has the ability to split and merge clusters automatically during the process and produces the the most reliable clustering results, by intrinsically integrating many clustering techniques and tasks. The SMART framework is implemented with two distinct clustering paradigms in two algorithms: competitive learning and finite mixture model. Nevertheless, within the proposed SMART framework, many other algorithms can be derived for different clustering paradigms. The minimum message length algorithm is integrated into the framework as the clustering selection criterion. The usefulness of the SMART framework and its algorithms is tested in demonstration datasets and simulated gene expression datasets. Moreover, two real microarray gene expression datasets are studied using this approach. Based on the performance of many metrics, all numerical results show that SMART is superior to compared existing self-splitting algorithms and traditional algorithms. Three main properties of the proposed SMART framework are summarized as: (1) needing no parameters dependent on the respective dataset or a priori knowledge about the datasets, (2) extendible to many different applications, (3) offering superior performance compared with counterpart algorithms.National Institute for Health Researc