ArticlePloS one2024
SillyPutty: Improved clustering by optimizing the silhouette width.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clustering is an important task in biomedical science, and it is widely believed that different data sets are best clustered using different algorithms. When choosing between clustering algorithms on the same data set, reseachers typically rely on global measures of quality, such as the mean silhouette width, and overlook the fine details of clustering. However, the silhouette width actually computes scores that describe how well each individual element is clustered. Inspired by this observation, we developed a novel clustering method, called SillyPutty. Unlike existing methods, SillyPutty uses the silhouette width for individual elements as a tool to optimize the mean silhouette width. This shift in perspective allows for a more granular evaluation of clustering quality, potentially addressing limitations in current methodologies. To test the SillyPutty algorithm, we first simulated a series of data sets using the Umpire R package and then used real-workd data from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Using these data sets, we compared SillyPutty to several existing algorithms using multiple metrics (Silhouette Width, Adjusted Rand Index, Entropy, Normalized Within-group Sum of Square errors, and Perfect Classification Count). Our findings revealed that SillyPutty is a valid standalone clustering method, comparable in accuracy to the best existing methods. We also found that the combination of hierarchical clustering followed by SillyPutty has the best overall performance in terms of both accuracy and speed. Availability: The SillyPutty R package can be downloaded from the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN).
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.