A Comparison of Document Clustering Techniques

TLDR: This paper compares the two main approaches to document clustering, agglomerative hierarchical clustering and K-means, and indicates that the bisecting K-MEans technique is better than the standard K-Means approach and as good or better as the hierarchical approaches that were tested for a variety of cluster evaluation metrics.

Abstract: This paper presents the results of an experimental study of some common document clustering techniques. In particular, we compare the two main approaches to document clustering, agglomerative hierarchical clustering and K-means. (For K-means we used a “standard” K-means algorithm and a variant of K-means, “bisecting” K-means.) Hierarchical clustering is often portrayed as the better quality clustering approach, but is limited because of its quadratic time complexity. In contrast, K-means and its variants have a time complexity which is linear in the number of documents, but are thought to produce inferior clusters. Sometimes K-means and agglomerative hierarchical approaches are combined so as to “get the best of both worlds.” However, our results indicate that the bisecting K-means technique is better than the standard K-means approach and as good or better than the hierarchical approaches that we tested for a variety of cluster evaluation metrics. We propose an explanation for these results that is based on an analysis of the specifics of the clustering algorithms and the nature of document