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

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

Faster k-Medoids Clustering: Improving the PAM, CLARA, and CLARANS Algorithms

Clustering non-Euclidean data is difficult, and one of the most used algorithms besides hierarchical clustering is the popular algorithm Partitioning Around Medoids (PAM), also simply referred to as k-medoids. In Euclidean geometry the mean-as used in k-means-is a good estimator for the cluster center, but this does not hold for arbitrary dissimilarities. PAM uses the medoid instead, the object with the smallest dissimilarity to all others in the cluster. This notion of centrality can be used with any (dis-)similarity, and thus is of high relevance to many domains such as biology that require the use of Jaccard, Gower, or more complex distances. A key issue with PAM is its high run time cost. We propose modifications to the PAM algorithm to achieve an O(k)-fold speedup in the second SWAP phase of the algorithm, but will still find the same results as the original PAM algorithm. If we slightly relax the choice of swaps performed (at comparable quality), we can further accelerate the algorithm by performing up to k swaps in each iteration. With the substantially faster SWAP, we can now also explore alternative strategies for choosing the initial medoids. We also show how the CLARA and CLARANS algorithms benefit from these modifications. It can easily be combined with earlier approaches to use PAM and CLARA on big data (some of which use PAM as a subroutine, hence can immediately benefit from these improvements), where the performance with high k becomes increasingly important. In experiments on real data with k=100, we observed a 200-fold speedup compared to the original PAM SWAP algorithm, making PAM applicable to larger data sets as long as we can afford to compute a distance matrix, and in particular to higher k (at k=2, the new SWAP was only 1.5 times faster, as the speedup is expected to increase with k)