ArticlePloS one2022
An analysis framework for clustering algorithm selection with applications to spectroscopy.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Study of anomaly registration detection based on multilayer kernel autoencoder extreme learning machine model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Critical factors influencing live birth rates in fresh embryo transfer for IVF: insights from cluster ensemble algorithms.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Subtypes and Mechanisms of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Proposed by Machine Learning Algorithms.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cluster analysis is a valuable unsupervised machine learning technique that is applied in a multitude of domains to identify similarities or clusters in unlabelled data. However, its performance is dependent of the characteristics of the data it is being applied to. There is no universally best clustering algorithm, and hence, there are numerous clustering algorithms available with different performance characteristics. This raises the problem of how to select an appropriate clustering algorithm for the given analytical purposes. We present and validate an analysis framework to address this problem. Unlike most current literature which focuses on characterizing the clustering algorithm itself, we present a wider holistic approach, with a focus on the user's needs, the data's characteristics and the characteristics of the clusters it may contain. In our analysis framework, we utilize a softer qualitative approach to identify appropriate characteristics for consideration when matching clustering algorithms to the intended application. These are used to generate a small subset of suitable clustering algorithms whose performance are then evaluated utilizing quantitative cluster validity indices. To validate our analysis framework for selecting clustering algorithms, we applied it to four different types of datasets: three datasets of homemade explosives spectroscopy, eight datasets of publicly available spectroscopy data covering food and biomedical applications, a gene expression cancer dataset, and three classic machine learning datasets. Each data type has discernible differences in the composition of the data and the context within which they are used. Our analysis framework, when applied to each of these challenges, recommended differing subsets of clustering algorithms for final quantitative performance evaluation. For each application, the recommended clustering algorithms were confirmed to contain the top performing algorithms through quantitative performance indices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.