Evaluating and Validating Cluster Results

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2007.08034v1
• Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 23:14:48 GMT
• Title: Evaluating and Validating Cluster Results
• Authors: Anupriya Vysala and Dr. Joseph Gomes
• Abstract summary: In this paper, both external evaluation and internal evaluation are performed on the cluster results of the IRIS dataset. For internal performance measures, the Silhouette Index and Sum of Square Errors are used. Finally, as a statistical tool, we used the frequency distribution method to compare and provide a visual representation of the distribution of observations within a clustering result and the original data.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Clustering is the technique to partition data according to their characteristics. Data that are similar in nature belong to the same cluster [1]. There are two types of evaluation methods to evaluate clustering quality. One is an external evaluation where the truth labels in the data sets are known in advance and the other is internal evaluation in which the evaluation is done with data set itself without true labels. In this paper, both external evaluation and internal evaluation are performed on the cluster results of the IRIS dataset. In the case of external evaluation Homogeneity, Correctness and V-measure scores are calculated for the dataset. For internal performance measures, the Silhouette Index and Sum of Square Errors are used. These internal performance measures along with the dendrogram (graphical tool from hierarchical Clustering) are used first to validate the number of clusters. Finally, as a statistical tool, we used the frequency distribution method to compare and provide a visual representation of the distribution of observations within a clustering result and the original data.

Related papers

• ABCDE: Application-Based Cluster Diff Evals [49.1574468325115]
  It aims to be practical: it allows items to have associated importance values that are application-specific, it is frugal in its use of human judgements when determining which clustering is better, and it can report metrics for arbitrary slices of items. The approach to measuring the delta in the clustering quality is novel: instead of trying to construct an expensive ground truth up front and evaluating the each clustering with respect to that, ABCDE samples questions for judgement on the basis of the actual diffs between the clusterings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-31T08:29:35Z)
• From A-to-Z Review of Clustering Validation Indices [4.08908337437878]
  We review and evaluate the performance of internal and external clustering validation indices on the most common clustering algorithms. We suggest a classification framework for examining the functionality of both internal and external clustering validation measures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-18T13:52:02Z)
• A structured regression approach for evaluating model performance across intersectional subgroups [53.91682617836498]
  Disaggregated evaluation is a central task in AI fairness assessment, where the goal is to measure an AI system's performance across different subgroups. We introduce a structured regression approach to disaggregated evaluation that we demonstrate can yield reliable system performance estimates even for very small subgroups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-26T14:21:45Z)
• Generalized Category Discovery with Clustering Assignment Consistency [56.92546133591019]
  Generalized category discovery (GCD) is a recently proposed open-world task. We propose a co-training-based framework that encourages clustering consistency. Our method achieves state-of-the-art performance on three generic benchmarks and three fine-grained visual recognition datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T00:32:47Z)
• A testing-based approach to assess the clusterability of categorical data [6.7937877930001775]
  TestCat is a testing-based approach to assess the clusterability of categorical data in terms of an analytical $p$-value. We apply our method to a set of benchmark categorical data sets, showing that TestCat outperforms those solutions for numeric data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-14T13:50:00Z)
• Algorithm-Agnostic Interpretations for Clustering [0.0]
  We propose algorithm-agnostic interpretation methods to explain clustering outcomes in reduced dimensions. The permutation feature importance for clustering represents a general framework based on shuffling feature values. All methods can be used with any clustering algorithm able to reassign instances through soft or hard labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-21T18:08:40Z)
• Sanity Check for External Clustering Validation Benchmarks using Internal Validation Measures [8.808021343665319]
  We address the lack of reliability in benchmarking clustering techniques based on labeled datasets. We propose a principled way to generate between-dataset internal measures that enable the comparison of CLM across datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-20T23:32:18Z)
• Anomaly Clustering: Grouping Images into Coherent Clusters of Anomaly Types [60.45942774425782]
  We introduce anomaly clustering, whose goal is to group data into coherent clusters of anomaly types. This is different from anomaly detection, whose goal is to divide anomalies from normal data. We present a simple yet effective clustering framework using a patch-based pretrained deep embeddings and off-the-shelf clustering methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-21T23:11:33Z)
• Contrastive Clustering [57.71729650297379]
  We propose Contrastive Clustering (CC) which explicitly performs the instance- and cluster-level contrastive learning. In particular, CC achieves an NMI of 0.705 (0.431) on the CIFAR-10 (CIFAR-100) dataset, which is an up to 19% (39%) performance improvement compared with the best baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-21T08:54:40Z)
• New advances in enumerative biclustering algorithms with online partitioning [80.22629846165306]
  This paper further extends RIn-Close_CVC, a biclustering algorithm capable of performing an efficient, complete, correct and non-redundant enumeration of maximal biclusters with constant values on columns in numerical datasets. The improved algorithm is called RIn-Close_CVC3, keeps those attractive properties of RIn-Close_CVC, and is characterized by: a drastic reduction in memory usage; a consistent gain in runtime.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-07T14:54:26Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.