Fourth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM'04)
DOI: 10.1109/icdm.2004.10100
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of Consensus Partition in Cluster Ensemble

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
66
0
2

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 106 publications
(68 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
66
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The votingbased literature utilizes different heuristics in attempting to solve the labelling correspondence problem. This problem is commonly formulated as a bipartite matching problem [6], where the optimal re-labelling is obtained by maximizing the agreement between the labelling of an ensemble partition with respect to a reference partition. The agreement is estimated by constructing a K × K contingency table between the two partitions, where K is the number of clusters in each partition 1 .…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The votingbased literature utilizes different heuristics in attempting to solve the labelling correspondence problem. This problem is commonly formulated as a bipartite matching problem [6], where the optimal re-labelling is obtained by maximizing the agreement between the labelling of an ensemble partition with respect to a reference partition. The agreement is estimated by constructing a K × K contingency table between the two partitions, where K is the number of clusters in each partition 1 .…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the voting-based consensus function the label mismatch is defined as the problem of finding the optimal re-labelling of a given partition with respect to a reference partition. This problem is commonly formulated as a weighted bipartite matching formulation [6,7], and it is solved by inspecting whether data patterns in two partitions share labels more than with other clusters. In this paper, we present an alternative simple, yet robust, implementation for generating a consistent labelling scheme among the different partitions of the ensemble.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Results of clustering using ETree in terms of %N M I. K is the number of experimental cluster centers. The next four columns are the performance of ETree itself together with using it as the base model of our boosting algorithm (CB) and applying voting [20], HGPA, and MCLA [5] consensus function learning methods. The next two columns indicate the results of using the methods of Frossyniotis et al [1] and Topchy et al [2] with ETree.…”
Section: Datasetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also implemented the algorithms proposed in [1,2] and compared their performance with our method. Additionally, we applied different consensus function learning methods, namely voting [20], HGPA, and MCLA [5], to the final ensemble. For all boosting methods we set the maximum number of base models to be 50 for ETree and 20 for k-means, respectively.…”
Section: Datasetsmentioning
confidence: 99%