Results 1  10
of
1,177
Cluster Ensembles  A Knowledge Reuse Framework for Combining Multiple Partitions
 Journal of Machine Learning Research
, 2002
"... This paper introduces the problem of combining multiple partitionings of a set of objects into a single consolidated clustering without accessing the features or algorithms that determined these partitionings. We first identify several application scenarios for the resultant 'knowledge reuse&ap ..."
Abstract

Cited by 603 (20 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
This paper introduces the problem of combining multiple partitionings of a set of objects into a single consolidated clustering without accessing the features or algorithms that determined these partitionings. We first identify several application scenarios for the resultant 'knowledge reuse' framework that we call cluster ensembles. The cluster ensemble problem is then formalized as a combinatorial optimization problem in terms of shared mutual information. In addition to a direct maximization approach, we propose three effective and efficient techniques for obtaining highquality combiners (consensus functions). The first combiner induces a similarity measure from the partitionings and then reclusters the objects. The second combiner is based on hypergraph partitioning. The third one collapses groups of clusters into metaclusters which then compete for each object to determine the combined clustering. Due to the low computational costs of our techniques, it is quite feasible to use a supraconsensus function that evaluates all three approaches against the objective function and picks the best solution for a given situation. We evaluate the effectiveness of cluster ensembles in three qualitatively different application scenarios: (i) where the original clusters were formed based on nonidentical sets of features, (ii) where the original clustering algorithms worked on nonidentical sets of objects, and (iii) where a common dataset is used and the main purpose of combining multiple clusterings is to improve the quality and robustness of the solution. Promising results are obtained in all three situations for synthetic as well as real datasets.
The University of Florida sparse matrix collection
 NA DIGEST
, 1997
"... The University of Florida Sparse Matrix Collection is a large, widely available, and actively growing set of sparse matrices that arise in real applications. Its matrices cover a wide spectrum of problem domains, both those arising from problems with underlying 2D or 3D geometry (structural enginee ..."
Abstract

Cited by 536 (17 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The University of Florida Sparse Matrix Collection is a large, widely available, and actively growing set of sparse matrices that arise in real applications. Its matrices cover a wide spectrum of problem domains, both those arising from problems with underlying 2D or 3D geometry (structural engineering, computational fluid dynamics, model reduction, electromagnetics, semiconductor devices, thermodynamics, materials, acoustics, computer graphics/vision, robotics/kinematics, and other discretizations) and those that typically do not have such geometry (optimization, circuit simulation, networks and graphs, economic and financial modeling, theoretical and quantum chemistry, chemical process simulation, mathematics and statistics, and power networks). The collection meets a vital need that artificiallygenerated matrices cannot meet, and is widely used by the sparse matrix algorithms community for the development and performance evaluation of sparse matrix algorithms. The collection includes software for accessing and managing the collection, from MATLAB, Fortran, and C.
Coclustering documents and words using Bipartite Spectral Graph Partitioning
, 2001
"... ..."
(Show Context)
Survey of clustering data mining techniques
, 2002
"... Accrue Software, Inc. Clustering is a division of data into groups of similar objects. Representing the data by fewer clusters necessarily loses certain fine details, but achieves simplification. It models data by its clusters. Data modeling puts clustering in a historical perspective rooted in math ..."
Abstract

Cited by 408 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Accrue Software, Inc. Clustering is a division of data into groups of similar objects. Representing the data by fewer clusters necessarily loses certain fine details, but achieves simplification. It models data by its clusters. Data modeling puts clustering in a historical perspective rooted in mathematics, statistics, and numerical analysis. From a machine learning perspective clusters correspond to hidden patterns, the search for clusters is unsupervised learning, and the resulting system represents a data concept. From a practical perspective clustering plays an outstanding role in data mining applications such as scientific data exploration, information retrieval and text mining, spatial database applications, Web analysis, CRM, marketing, medical diagnostics, computational biology, and many others. Clustering is the subject of active research in several fields such as statistics, pattern recognition, and machine learning. This survey focuses on clustering in data mining. Data mining adds to clustering the complications of very large datasets with very many attributes of different types. This imposes unique
Data Clustering: 50 Years Beyond KMeans
, 2008
"... Organizing data into sensible groupings is one of the most fundamental modes of understanding and learning. As an example, a common scheme of scientific classification puts organisms into taxonomic ranks: domain, kingdom, phylum, class, etc.). Cluster analysis is the formal study of algorithms and m ..."
Abstract

Cited by 294 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Organizing data into sensible groupings is one of the most fundamental modes of understanding and learning. As an example, a common scheme of scientific classification puts organisms into taxonomic ranks: domain, kingdom, phylum, class, etc.). Cluster analysis is the formal study of algorithms and methods for grouping, or clustering, objects according to measured or perceived intrinsic characteristics or similarity. Cluster analysis does not use category labels that tag objects with prior identifiers, i.e., class labels. The absence of category information distinguishes data clustering (unsupervised learning) from classification or discriminant analysis (supervised learning). The aim of clustering is exploratory in nature to find structure in data. Clustering has a long and rich history in a variety of scientific fields. One of the most popular and simple clustering algorithms, Kmeans, was first published in 1955. In spite of the fact that Kmeans was proposed over 50 years ago and thousands of clustering algorithms have been published since then, Kmeans is still widely used. This speaks to the difficulty of designing a general purpose clustering algorithm and the illposed problem of clustering. We provide a brief overview of clustering, summarize well known clustering methods, discuss the major challenges and key issues in designing clustering algorithms, and point out some of the emerging and useful research directions, including semisupervised clustering, ensemble clustering, simultaneous feature selection, and data clustering and large scale data clustering.
Building rome in a day.
 In Proc. Int. Conf. on Computer Vision.
, 2009
"... We present a system that can reconstruct 3D geometry from large, unorganized collections of photographs such as those found by searching for a given city (e.g., Rome) on Internet photosharing sites. Our system is built on a set of new, distributed computer vision algorithms for image matching and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 285 (30 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We present a system that can reconstruct 3D geometry from large, unorganized collections of photographs such as those found by searching for a given city (e.g., Rome) on Internet photosharing sites. Our system is built on a set of new, distributed computer vision algorithms for image matching and 3D reconstruction, designed to maximize parallelism at each stage of the pipeline and to scale gracefully with both the size of the problem and the amount of available computation. Our experimental results demonstrate that it is now possible to reconstruct cityscale image collections with more than a hundred thousand images in less than a day. intRoDuction Amateur photography was once largely a personal endeavor. Traditionally, a photographer would capture a moment on film and share it with a small number of friends and family members, perhaps storing a few hundred of them in a shoebox. The advent of digital photography, and the recent growth of photosharing Web sites such as Flickr.com, have brought about a seismic change in photography and the use of photo collections. Today, a photograph shared online can potentially be seen by millions of people. As a result, we now have access to a vast, evergrowing collection of photographs the world over capturing its cities and landmarks innumerable times. For instance, a search for the term "Rome" on Flickr returns nearly 3 million photographs. This collection represents an increasingly complete photographic record of the city, capturing every popular site, façade, interior, fountain, sculpture, painting, and café. Virtually anything that people find interesting in Rome has been captured from thousands of viewpoints and under myriad illumination and weather conditions. For example, the Trevi Fountain appears in over 50,000 of these photographs. How much of the city of Rome can be reconstructed in 3D from this photo collection? In principle, the photos of Rome on Flickr represent an ideal data set for 3D modeling research, as they capture the highlights of the city in exquisite detail and from a broad range of viewpoints. However, extracting high quality 3D models from such a collection is challenging for several reasons. First, the photos are unstructuredthey are taken in no particular order and we have no control over the distribution of camera viewpoints. Second, they are uncalibratedthe photos are taken by thousands of different photographers and we know very little about the camera settings. Third, the scale of the problem is
Statistical properties of community structure in large social and information networks
"... A large body of work has been devoted to identifying community structure in networks. A community is often though of as a set of nodes that has more connections between its members than to the remainder of the network. In this paper, we characterize as a function of size the statistical and structur ..."
Abstract

Cited by 246 (14 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
A large body of work has been devoted to identifying community structure in networks. A community is often though of as a set of nodes that has more connections between its members than to the remainder of the network. In this paper, we characterize as a function of size the statistical and structural properties of such sets of nodes. We define the network community profile plot, which characterizes the “best ” possible community—according to the conductance measure—over a wide range of size scales, and we study over 70 large sparse realworld networks taken from a wide range of application domains. Our results suggest a significantly more refined picture of community structure in large realworld networks than has been appreciated previously. Our most striking finding is that in nearly every network dataset we examined, we observe tight but almost trivial communities at very small scales, and at larger size scales, the best possible communities gradually “blend in ” with the rest of the network and thus become less “communitylike.” This behavior is not explained, even at a qualitative level, by any of the commonlyused network generation models. Moreover, this behavior is exactly the opposite of what one would expect based on experience with and intuition from expander graphs, from graphs that are wellembeddable in a lowdimensional structure, and from small social networks that have served as testbeds of community detection algorithms. We have found, however, that a generative model, in which new edges are added via an iterative “forest fire” burning process, is able to produce graphs exhibiting a network community structure similar to our observations.
Community structure in large networks: Natural cluster sizes and the absence of large welldefined clusters
, 2008
"... A large body of work has been devoted to defining and identifying clusters or communities in social and information networks, i.e., in graphs in which the nodes represent underlying social entities and the edges represent some sort of interaction between pairs of nodes. Most such research begins wit ..."
Abstract

Cited by 208 (17 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
A large body of work has been devoted to defining and identifying clusters or communities in social and information networks, i.e., in graphs in which the nodes represent underlying social entities and the edges represent some sort of interaction between pairs of nodes. Most such research begins with the premise that a community or a cluster should be thought of as a set of nodes that has more and/or better connections between its members than to the remainder of the network. In this paper, we explore from a novel perspective several questions related to identifying meaningful communities in large social and information networks, and we come to several striking conclusions. Rather than defining a procedure to extract sets of nodes from a graph and then attempt to interpret these sets as a “real ” communities, we employ approximation algorithms for the graph partitioning problem to characterize as a function of size the statistical and structural properties of partitions of graphs that could plausibly be interpreted as communities. In particular, we define the network community profile plot, which characterizes the “best ” possible community—according to the conductance measure—over a wide range of size scales. We study over 100 large realworld networks, ranging from traditional and online social networks, to technological and information networks and
Network Topology Generators: DegreeBased vs. Structural
, 2002
"... Following the longheld belief that the Internet is hierarchical, the network topology generators most widely used by the Internet research community, TransitStub and Tiers, create networks with a deliberately hierarchical structure. However, in 1999 a seminal paper by Faloutsos et al. revealed tha ..."
Abstract

Cited by 207 (17 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Following the longheld belief that the Internet is hierarchical, the network topology generators most widely used by the Internet research community, TransitStub and Tiers, create networks with a deliberately hierarchical structure. However, in 1999 a seminal paper by Faloutsos et al. revealed that the Internet's degree distribution is a powerlaw. Because the degree distributions produced by the TransitStub and Tiers generators are not powerlaws, the research community has largely dismissed them as inadequate and proposed new network generators that attempt to generate graphs with powerlaw degree distributions.