A Survey On Unsupervised Evaluation Criteria For Image Clustering Validation

Akar Taher

doi:10.25212/lfu.qzj.2.2.10

توێژەران

Akar Taher Department of Software Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Koya University – University Park, Kurdistan Region of Iraq (Part time Lecturer at Lebanese French University)

##semicolon##

https://doi.org/10.25212/lfu.qzj.2.2.10

##semicolon##

Evaluation, Criteria, Validation Unsupervised, Supervised, Clustering.

پوختە

The evaluation of clustering results is the most difficult and frustrating part of cluster analysis. The challenge is to validate the obtained results without any apriori information. Validity indexes are widely used approach for evaluation of clustering results. These approaches can use three criteria: i) external (also called supervised) criteria: this type is based on comparing the obtained results with a previously known result (frequently called ground truth) and compute the similarity, ii) internal criteria (also called unsupervised) criteria: estimate the quality of the result using internal information of the data alone, and iii) relative criteria: this
means multiple usages of one of the two above types ofdifferent results and see which is better than the other. Therefore we can say: depending on the information available and the problem type, different types of indexes might be used for cluster validation. Sometimes due to the complexity of the datasets, one validity index is not sufficient to evaluate the quality of the obtained results, and then a combination of two or more index should be used. In this paper, a basic general review on evaluation criteria is first given and then the focus is spotted on unsupervised criteria as they are much more useful, thanks to their objective functionality.

##plugins.generic.usageStats.downloads##

##plugins.generic.usageStats.noStats##

سەرچاوەکان

R. Xu and I. Wunsch, D., “Survey of clustering algorithms,” IEEE Trans. Neural Netw., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 645–678, 2005.

C. C. Aggarwal and C. K. Reddy, Data Clustering: Algorithms and Applications. CRC Press, 2013.

A. K. Jain, M. N. Murty, and P. J. Flynn, “Data Clustering: A Review,” ACM Comput Surv, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 264–323, Sep. 1999.

A. Biswas and B. Biswas, “Defining quality metrics for graph clustering evaluation,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 71, pp. 1–17, Apr. 2017.

F. Zaidi, D. Archambault, and G. Melançon, “Evaluating the Quality of Clustering Algorithms Using Cluster Path Lengths,” in Advances in Data Mining. Applications and Theoretical Aspects, 2010, pp. 42–56.

M. Halkidi, Y. Batistakis, and M. Vazirgiannis, “Cluster Validity Methods: Part I,” SIGMOD Rec, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 40–45, Jun. 2002.

M. Halkidi, Y. Batistakis, and M. Vazirgiannis, “Clustering Validity Checking Methods: Part II,” SIGMOD Rec, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 19–27, Sep. 2002.

W. M. Rand, “Objective Criteria for the Evaluation of Clustering Methods,” J. Am. Stat. Assoc., vol. 66, no. 336, pp. 846–850, 2012.

M. K. Pakhira, S. Bandyopadhyay, and U. Maulik, “Validity index for crisp and fuzzy clusters,” Pattern Recognit., vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 487–501, Mar. 2004.

O. Arbelaitz, I. Gurrutxaga, J. Muguerza, J. M. Pérez, and I. Perona, “An extensive comparative study of cluster validity indices,” Pattern Recognit., vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 243– 256, Jan. 2013.

K. Chehdi, A. Taher, and C. Cariou, “Stable and unsupervised fuzzy C-means method and its validation in the context of multicomponent images,” J. Electron. Imaging, vol. 24, no. 6, p. 061117, Dec. 2015.

A. K. Jain and R. C. Dubes, Algorithms for Clustering Data. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1988.

R.M. Haralick and L. G. Shaprio, “Image Segmentation Techniques,” presented at the Computer Vision Graphics and Image Processing, Arlington, 1985, vol. 29, pp. 100– 132.

J. S. Weszka and A. Rosenfeld, “Threshold Evaluation Techniques,” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 622–629, Aug. 1978.

M. D. Levine and A. M. Nazif, “Dynamic Measurement of Computer Generated Image Segmentations,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. PAMI-7, no. 2, pp. 155– 164, Mar. 1985.

B. S. Mehmet Sezgin, “Survey over image thresholding techniques and quantitative performance evaluation,” J. Electron. Imaging, vol. 13, pp. 146–168, 2004.

W. G. Cochran, “Some Methods for Strengthening the Common X 2 Tests,” Biometrics, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 417, Dec. 1954.

N. R. Pal and S. K. Pal, “Entropic thresholding,” Signal Process., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 97– 108, Feb. 1989.

R. Zéboudj, Filtrage, seuillage automatique, contraste et contours: du pré-traitement à l’analyse d’image. Saint-Etienne, 1988.

D. L. Davies and D. W. Bouldin, “A Cluster Separation Measure,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. PAMI-1, no. 2, pp. 224–227, Apr. 1979.

P. J. Rousseeuw, “Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis,” J. Comput. Appl. Math., vol. 20, pp. 53–65, Nov. 1987.

J. C. Dunn†, “Well-Separated Clusters and Optimal Fuzzy Partitions,” J. Cybern., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 95–104, Jan. 1974.

C. Rosenberger, “Mise en oeuvre d’un systeme adaptatif de segmentation d’images,” Phd Thesis, University of Rennes 1, 1999.

C. Rosenberger, K. Chehdi, and C. Kermad, “Adaptive segmentation system,” presented at the 5th International Conference on Signal Processing, WCCC-ICSP, 2000, vol. 2, pp. 918–921 vol.2.

A. Taher, K. Chehdi, and C. Cariou, “Hyperspectral image segmentation using a cooperative nonparametric approach,” presented at the Image and signal processing for remote sensing XIX, Dresden-Germany, 2013, vol. 8892, p. 88920J–88920J–8.

V. K. Dehariya, S. K. Shrivastava, and R. C. Jain, “Clustering of Image Data Set Using K-Means and Fuzzy K-Means Algorithms,” presented at the International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Communication Networks (CICN), 2010, pp. 386–

P. Brodatz, Textures: A Photographic Album for Artists and Designers. Dover Publications, Incorporated, 1999.

A. Taher, Approche coopérative et non supervisée de partitionnement d’images hyperspectrales pour l’aide à la décision. Rennes 1, 2014.