4.7 Article

Memetic differential evolution methods for clustering problems

期刊

PATTERN RECOGNITION
卷 114, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.patcog.2021.107849

关键词

Global optimization; Clustering; Minimum sum-of-squares; Hybrid genetic algorithm; K-MEANS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Euclidean Minimum Sum-of-Squares Clustering (MSSC) is a key model for clustering and has attracted much attention due to its NP-hardness. Recent research has focused on improving the classical K-MEANS algorithm by selecting starting configurations or using it as a local search method in a global optimization algorithm. This paper proposes a new implementation of the Memetic Differential Evolution (MDE) algorithm specifically designed for the MSSC problem, showing good quality and efficiency in comparison to existing methods.
The Euclidean Minimum Sum-of-Squares Clustering ( MSSC ) is one of the most important models for the clustering problem. Due to its NP-hardness, the problem continues to receive much attention in the scientific literature and several heuristic procedures have been proposed. Recent research has been devoted to the improvement of the classical K-MEANS algorithm, either by suitably selecting its starting configuration or by using it as a local search method within a global optimization algorithm. This paper follows this last approach by proposing a new implementation of a Memetic Differential Evolution ( MDE ) algorithm specifically designed for the MSSC problem and based on the repeated execution of K-MEANS from selected configurations. In this paper we describe how to adapt MDE to the clustering problem and we show, through a vast set of numerical experiments, that the proposed method has very good quality, measured in terms of the minimization of the objective function, as well as a very good efficiency, measured in the number of calls to the local optimization routine, with respect to state of the art methods. (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据