Paper detail

Ground Truth Bias in External Cluster Validity Indices

It has been noticed that some external CVIs exhibit a preferential bias towards a larger or smaller number of clusters which is monotonic (directly or inversely) in the number of clusters in candidate partitions. This type of bias is caused by the functional form of the CVI model. For example, the popular Rand index (RI) exhibits a monotone increasing (NCinc) bias, while the Jaccard Index (JI) index suffers from a monotone decreasing (NCdec) bias. This type of bias has been previously recognized in the literature. In this work, we identify a new type of bias arising from the distribution of the ground truth (reference) partition against which candidate partitions are compared. We call this new type of bias ground truth (GT) bias. This type of bias occurs if a change in the reference partition causes a change in the bias status (e.g., NCinc, NCdec) of a CVI. For example, NCinc bias in the RI can be changed to NCdec bias by skewing the distribution of clusters in the ground truth partition. It is important for users to be aware of this new type of biased behaviour, since it may affect the interpretations of CVI results. The objective of this article is to study the empirical and theoretical implications of GT bias. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first extensive study of such a property for external cluster validity indices.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.