Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Clustering is ill-defined. Unlike supervised learning where labels lead to crisp performance criteria such as accuracy and squared error, clustering quality depends on how the clusters will be used. Devising clustering criteria that capture what users need is difficult. Most clustering algorithms search for optimal clusterings based on a pre-specified clustering criterion. Our approach differs. We search for many alternate clusterings of the data, and then allow users to select the clustering(s) that best fit their needs. Meta clustering first finds a variety of clusterings and then clusters this diverse set of clusterings so that users must only examine a small number of qualitatively different clusterings. We present methods for automatically generating a diverse set of alternate clusterings, as well as methods for grouping clusterings into meta clusters. We evaluate meta clustering on four test problems and two case studies. Surprisingly, clusterings that would be of most interest to users often are not very compact clusterings. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2006 | 10.1109/ICDM.2006.103 | ICDM |
Keywords | DocType | ISBN |
qualitatively different clusterings,clustering algorithms search,meta clustering,clustering criterion,compact clusterings,alternate clusterings,Meta Clustering,grouping clusterings,optimal clusterings,clustering quality,diverse set | Conference | 0-7695-2701-9 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
32 | 1.22 | 11 |
Authors | ||
4 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rich Caruana | 1 | 4503 | 655.71 |
| Mohamed Elhawary | 2 | 79 | 4.40 |
| Nam Nguyen | 3 | 331 | 16.64 |
| Casey Smith | 4 | 43 | 2.46 |