| Literature DB >> 32612647 |
Zhe Zhang1, Xiyu Liu1, Lin Wang1.
Abstract
There are two problems in the traditional spectral clustering algorithm. Firstly, when it uses Gaussian kernel function to construct the similarity matrix, different scale parameters in Gaussian kernel function will lead to different results of the algorithm. Secondly, K-means algorithm is often used in the clustering stage of the spectral clustering algorithm. It needs to initialize the cluster center randomly, which will result in the instability of the results. In this paper, an improved spectral clustering algorithm is proposed to solve these two problems. In constructing a similarity matrix, we proposed an improved Gaussian kernel function, which is based on the distance information of some nearest neighbors and can adaptively select scale parameters. In the clustering stage, beetle antennae search algorithm with damping factor is proposed to complete the clustering to overcome the problem of instability of the clustering results. In the experiment, we use four artificial data sets and seven UCI data sets to verify the performance of our algorithm. In addition, four images in BSDS500 image data sets are segmented in this paper, and the results show that our algorithm is better than other comparison algorithms in image segmentation.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32612647 PMCID: PMC7275956 DOI: 10.1155/2020/1648573
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Algorithm 1NJW algorithm.
Figure 1Iterative results of BAS with or without damping factor in the Iris data set. (a) BAS. (b) BAS with damping factor.
Algorithm 2SC-DBAS algorithm.
Data set information.
| Data set | Objects | Attributes | Classes | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Iris | 150 | 4 | 3 | UCI |
| Wine | 178 | 13 | 3 | UCI |
| Seeds | 210 | 6 | 3 | UCI |
| Zoo | 101 | 16 | 7 | UCI |
| Glass | 214 | 10 | 6 | UCI |
| Sonar | 208 | 60 | 2 | UCI |
| Ionosphere | 351 | 34 | 2 | UCI |
| Spiral | 944 | 2 | 2 | Artificial |
| Two moons | 2000 | 2 | 2 | Artificial |
| Three circles | 3603 | 2 | 3 | Artificial |
| Zigzag | 1002 | 2 | 3 | Artificial |
Accuracy of six algorithms on artificial data sets.
| Data set | K-means | NJW | MPSC | PGSC | SC-NP | SC-DBAS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spiral | 0.5975 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.5890 | 1 |
| Two moons | 0.7337 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.7170 | 1 |
| Three circles | 0.5554 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.5753 | 1 |
| Zigzag | 0.7076 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.7275 | 1 |
Figure 2Clustering results using the proposed algorithm for artificial data sets. (a) Spiral. (b) Three circles. (c) Two moons. (d) Zigzag.
Results of six algorithms on UCI data sets.
| Data set | Evaluation indicators | K-means | NJW | MPSC | PGSC | SC-NP | SC-DBAS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Iris | Accuracy | 0.8933 | 0.8933 | 0.9067 | 0.9000 | 0.8933 |
|
| ARI | 0.5516 | 0.6850 | 0.7583 | 0.8859 | 0.8797 |
| |
| F1 score | 0.8918 | 0.8988 | 0.9057 | 0.8988 | 0.8918 |
| |
| Time (s) | 0.2610 | 0.5164 | 0.5880 | 0.0669 | 0.7841 | 0.0553 | |
|
| |||||||
| Wine | Accuracy | 0.6530 | 0.6742 | 0.5505 | 0.6067 | 0.6910 |
|
| ARI | 0.7943 | 0.8986 | 0.9310 | 0.5614 | 0.6938 |
| |
| F1 score | 0.6363 | 0.6276 | 0.6057 | 0.6510 | 0.6531 |
| |
| Time (s) | 0.2206 | 0.4845 | 0.4020 | 0.0443 | 0.9687 | 0.0638 | |
|
| |||||||
| Seeds | Accuracy | 0.7008 | 0.7905 | 0.7194 | 0.8810 | 0.8905 |
|
| ARI | 0.7006 | 0.7022 | 0.6865 | 0.8594 | 0.8681 |
| |
| F1 score | 0.8897 | 0.8150 | 0.8914 | 0.8813 | 0.8913 |
| |
| Time (s) | 0.2195 | 0.4893 | 0.4641 | 0.0403 | 1.0381 | 0.0641 | |
|
| |||||||
| Zoo | Accuracy | 0.6534 | 0.6337 | 0.8119 |
| 0.8416 |
|
| ARI | 0.6359 | 0.7441 | 0.7758 | 0.8962 | 0.8994 |
| |
| F1 score | 0.6319 | 0.8038 | 0.8389 | 0.8190 | 0.8045 |
| |
| Time (s) | 0.2561 | 0.5035 | 0.2844 | 0.0555 | 0.9538 | 0.0608 | |
|
| |||||||
| Glass | Accuracy | 0.7913 | 0.6542 | 0.8131 | 0.7897 |
| 0.8598 |
| ARI | 0.7375 | 0.5718 | 0.7767 | 0.8206 | 0.8552 |
| |
| F1 score | 0.6812 | 0.5515 | 0.6872 |
| 0.6973 | 0.7364 | |
| Time (s) | 0.2418 | 0.4335 | 0.5547 | 0.0512 | 0.9710 | 0.0712 | |
|
| |||||||
| Sonar | Accuracy | 0.3942 | 0.3701 | 0.4346 | 0.5385 | 0.5337 |
|
| ARI | 0.0827 | 0.0022 | 0.1324 | 0.5006 | 0.4999 |
| |
| F1 score | 0.4623 | 0.6119 | 0.5556 | 0.5370 | 0.5593 |
| |
| Time (s) | 0.2422 | 0.5950 | 0.4181 | 0.0587 | 1.6458 | 0.0794 | |
|
| |||||||
| Ionosphere | Accuracy | 0.3589 | 0.6182 | 0.7094 | 0.6410 | 0.6410 |
|
| ARI | 0.3240 | 0.4237 | 0.4772 | 0.4989 | 0.5253 |
| |
| F1 score | 0.4149 | 0.6885 | 0.6902 | 0.6188 | 0.6817 |
| |
| Time (s) | 0.2105 | 1.011 | 0.892 | 0.1354 | 2.8606 | 0.1108 | |
Figure 3Results of six algorithms on UCI data sets. (a) Accuracy. (b) ARI. (c) F1 score. (d) Time (s).
Figure 4(a) Original image, (b) K-means, (c) NJW, (d) PGSC, (e) SC-NP, and (f) our proposed algorithm.
Accuracy of five algorithms on images.
| K-means | NJW | PGSC | SC-NP | SC-DBAS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Image 1 | 0.8804 | 0.9483 | 0.9483 | 0.9304 | 0.9943 |
| Image 2 | 0.5562 | 0.5562 | 0.5347 | 0.9942 | 0.9969 |
| Image 3 | 0.9520 | 0.9696 | 0.9729 | 0.9722 | 0.9741 |
| Image 4 | 0.9902 | 0.9883 | 0.9920 | 0.9917 | 0.9924 |