Abstract

Finite mixture models are widely used for modeling and clustering data. When they are used for clustering, they are often interpreted by regarding each component as one cluster. However, this assumption may be invalid when the components overlap. It leads to the issue of analyzing such overlaps to correctly understand the models. The primary purpose of this paper is to establish a theoretical framework for interpreting the overlapping mixture models by estimating how they overlap, using measures of information such as entropy and mutual information. This is achieved by merging components to regard multiple components as one cluster and summarizing the merging results. First, we propose three conditions that any merging criterion should satisfy. Then, we investigate whether several existing merging criteria satisfy the conditions and modify them to fulfill more conditions. Second, we propose a novel concept named clustering summarization to evaluate the merging results. In it, we can quantify how overlapped and biased the clusters are, using mutual information-based criteria. Using artificial and real datasets, we empirically demonstrate that our methods of modifying criteria and summarizing results are effective for understanding the cluster structures. We therefore give a new view of interpretability/explainability for model-based clustering.

Highlights

  • We propose a new stopping condition based on normalized mixture complexity (NMC)

  • We have established the framework of theoretically interpreting overlapping mixture models by merging the components and summarizing merging results

  • We considered entropy-based criterion (Ent), directly estimated misclassification probabilities (DEMP), and mixture complexity (MC) and their modifications to investigate whether they satisfied the essential conditions

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Finite mixture models are widely used for modeling data and finding latent clusters (see McLachlan and Peel [1] and Fraley and Raftery [2] for overviews and references). When they are used for clustering, they are typically interpreted by regarding each component as a single cluster. The one-to-one correspondence between the clusters and mixture components does not hold when the components overlap. This is because the clustering structure becomes more ambiguous and complex. We need an analysis of the overlaps to correctly interpret the models

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call