4.5 Article

Parallel Hierarchical Subspace Clustering of Categorical Data

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMPUTERS
Volume 68, Issue 4, Pages 542-555

Publisher

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/TC.2018.2879332

Keywords

Hierarchical subspace-clustering; LSH-based data partitioning; categorical data; Hadoop

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61876122]
  2. U.S. National Science Foundation [IIS-1618669, CNS-0917137, CCF-0845257]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Parallel clustering is an important research area of big data analysis. The conventional Hierarchical Agglomerative Clustering (HAC) techniques are inadequate to handle big-scale categorical datasets due to two drawbacks. First, HAC consumes excessive CPU time and memory resources; and second, it is non-trivial to decompose clustering tasks into independent sub-tasks executed in parallel. We solve these two problems by a MapReduce-based hierarchical subspace-clustering algorithm - called PAPU - using LSH-based data partitioning. PAPU is conducive to partitioning a large-scale dataset into multiple independent sub-datasets, into which similar data objects are mapped. Advocating parallel computing, PAPU obtains sub-clusters corresponding to respective attribute subspaces from independent chunks in the local clustering phase. To improve the accuracy of approximated clustering results, PAPU measures various scale clusters by applying the hierarchical clustering scheme to iteratively merge sub-clusters during the global clustering phase. We implement PAPU on a 24-node Hadoop computing platform. The experimental results reveal that hierarchical subspace-clustering coupled with the data-partitioning strategy achieves high clustering efficiency on both synthetic and real-world large-scale datasets. The experiments also demonstrate that PAPU delivers superior performance in terms of extensibility and scalability (e.g., a nearly linear speedup).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available