Aivia Software
Automatic Object Classifier
Comparison of methods
While both K-means and PhenoGraph-Leiden are clustering methods, their approaches and ideal applications differ significantly. K-means partitions data into clusters by minimizing intra-cluster variance, often in Euclidean space. It requires the number of clusters (K) to be specified a priori and is sensitive to initialization. In contrast, Pheno-Leiden leverages graph-based methods to emphasize local relationships and naturally reveal data structures without the strict necessity of pre-specifying the number of clusters. PhenoGraph-Leiden is particularly adept at handling high-dimensional data with intricate relationships, such as those found in single-cell datasets, whereas K-means might struggle or oversimplify such datasets due to its linear separation assumption, PhenoGraph-Leiden can unveil more nuanced cell populations or states.
When to use Kmeans over Phenograph-Leiden:
Prior Knowledge
If you have prior knowledge or a reasonable assumption about the number of clusters in your data, K-means can be directly applied, whereas graph-based methods might not always offer a straightforward way to impose such prior knowledge
Simplicity and Interpretability
K-means is a straightforward algorithm with a clear objective function of minimizing the variance within clusters. K-means also requires little parameter tuning, where the only parameter required is the number of clusters to assign data points to. This simplicity often leads to easier interpretation and visualization of the results. K-means also assumes clusters to be spherical and generally equal in size, which can work well if actual data clusters align with this assumption
Computational Efficiency
For certain datasets, K-means can be computationally faster, especially when the number of dimensions and datapoints is relatively low.
Avoiding Overclustering
Graph-based methods can sometimes result in overclustering, where too many small, granular clusters are identified. While this can be beneficial for revealing fine structures in data, there are contexts where broader groupings are more desirable.
When to use Phenograph-Leiden over Kmeans:
High-Dimensionality
PhenoGraph-Leiden is particularly suited for high-dimensional datasets, such as single-cell RNA sequencing data, where the underlying structure might be obscured due to analyzing and organizing data in high-dimensional spaces.
Complex Data Structures
Graph-based methods like PhenoGraph-Leiden can identify intricate and non-linear relationships in the data, making them adept at uncovering nuanced clusters that might not be evident to linear methods like K-means.
No Strict Need for Pre-defined Cluster Number
While K-means necessitates a predetermined number of clusters, PhenoGraph-Leiden has the capability to intuitively discern the data's inherent structure without mandating a pre-specified cluster count. Nonetheless, fine-tuning PhenoGraph-Leiden parameters to obtain optimal clustering results introduces its own set of challenges, such as increased computational cost, potential overfitting to specific data characteristics, and the complexity of navigating interdependent parameters. It is crucial to approach this tuning process with both caution and insight to ensure that the resulting clusters are contextually meaningful.
Emphasis on Local Relationships
PhenoGraph-Leiden focuses on local relationships between data points, emphasizing the intrinsic structure and connectivity within the data, which can sometimes be more informative than global relationships. Additionally, K-means generally assumes that clusters are spherical and equally sized, which might not always be the case, especially in complex datasets. Graph-based methods do not make such assumptions.
Noise and Outliers
Graph-based methods can be more robust to noise and outliers, given their emphasis on local neighborhoods and connectivity. Algorithms like K-means clustering on the other hand are more sensitive to outliers, because computing the cluster center is easily influenced by extreme values.
Evaluating Cluster Fitting through Confidence Scores
The Silhouette Score is a widely-used metric for assessing the quality of clusters in data analysis. It measures the coherence of data points within their clusters relative to other clusters. For efficient processing with large datasets, we utilize an approximation method known as the "Approximate Silhouette Score." This method is adapted for use with the automatic clustering algorithms (k-means and Phenograph Leiden). The resultant confidence scoring for each point's clustering can be seen under Spreadsheets
or plotted under Charts
.Methodology
1. Definition: The silhouette score traditionally calculates the mean intra-cluster distance (a) and the mean nearest-cluster distance (b) for each data point. The score for a point is (b−a)/max(a,b), which ranges from -1 (incorrectly clustered) to +1 (highly appropriate clustering)3.
2. Approximation Technique: Given the computational intensity of exact distance calculations for large datasets, we approximate the average distances using the root-mean-squared distance. We utilize the centroid of each cluster for computing the nearest-cluster distance to each data point, while the approximate mean intra-cluster distance is computed using the root-mean-square of distances between the target point and other points within the same cluster4.
3. Normalization: To simplify interpretation, the silhouette scores are linearly normalized from their original range of -1 to +1 to a new range of 0 to 1. Any point that has a score below 0.5 would be considered incorrectly clustered.
A tutorial on how to use and visualize confidence scores can be found at How to auto-classify objects and visualize them.
References
- MacQueen J. Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability. 1967 Jun 21 (Vol. 1, No. 14, pp. 281-297).
- Traag VA, Waltman L, Van Eck NJ. From Louvain to Leiden: guaranteeing well-connected communities. Scientific Reports. 2019 Mar 26;9(1):5233.
- Rousseeuw, P. J. (1987). Silhouettes: a graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of computational and applied mathematics, 20, 53-65.
- Lenssen, L., & Schubert, E. (2022, September). Clustering by direct optimization of the medoid silhouette. In International Conference on Similarity Search and Applications (pp. 190-204). Cham: Springer International Publishing.