Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38848330›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

SillyPutty: Improved clustering by optimizing the silhouette width.

Polina Bombina, Dwayne Tally, Zachary B Abrams, Kevin R Coombes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Polina BombinaDepartment of Biostatistics, Data Science and Epidemiology, Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, United States of America.ORCID 0009-0007-4221-7354
Dwayne TallyDepartment of Informatics, Indiana University, United States of America.
Zachary B AbramsDivision of Data Science and Biostatistics, Institute for Informatics, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, United States of America.
Kevin R CoombesDepartment of Biostatistics, Data Science and Epidemiology, Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7630-2123

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

AlgorithmsBiomedical TechnologyCluster AnalysisData AnalysisDatasets as Topic

Identifiers

PMID38848330
PMCPMC11161052

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.