TasksSotADatasetsPapersMethodsSubmitAbout
Papers With Code 2

A community resource for machine learning research: papers, code, benchmarks, and state-of-the-art results.

Explore

Notable BenchmarksAll SotADatasetsPapersMethods

Community

Submit ResultsAbout

Data sourced from the PWC Archive (CC-BY-SA 4.0). Built by the community, for the community.

Papers/Deep clustering: On the link between discriminative models...

Deep clustering: On the link between discriminative models and K-means

Mohammed Jabi, Marco Pedersoli, Amar Mitiche, Ismail Ben Ayed

2018-10-09Deep ClusteringregressionImage ClusteringClustering
PaperPDFCode(official)

Abstract

In the context of recent deep clustering studies, discriminative models dominate the literature and report the most competitive performances. These models learn a deep discriminative neural network classifier in which the labels are latent. Typically, they use multinomial logistic regression posteriors and parameter regularization, as is very common in supervised learning. It is generally acknowledged that discriminative objective functions (e.g., those based on the mutual information or the KL divergence) are more flexible than generative approaches (e.g., K-means) in the sense that they make fewer assumptions about the data distributions and, typically, yield much better unsupervised deep learning results. On the surface, several recent discriminative models may seem unrelated to K-means. This study shows that these models are, in fact, equivalent to K-means under mild conditions and common posterior models and parameter regularization. We prove that, for the commonly used logistic regression posteriors, maximizing the $L_2$ regularized mutual information via an approximate alternating direction method (ADM) is equivalent to a soft and regularized K-means loss. Our theoretical analysis not only connects directly several recent state-of-the-art discriminative models to K-means, but also leads to a new soft and regularized deep K-means algorithm, which yields competitive performance on several image clustering benchmarks.

Results

TaskDatasetMetricValueModel
Image ClusteringCMU-PIEAccuracy0.902SR-K-means
Image ClusteringCMU-PIENMI0.945SR-K-means
Image ClusteringMNIST-fullNMI0.913SR-K-means
Image ClusteringFRGCAccuracy0.413SR-K-means
Image ClusteringFRGCNMI0.487SR-K-means
Image ClusteringUSPSAccuracy0.974SR-K-means
Image ClusteringUSPSNMI0.936SR-K-means
Image ClusteringYouTube Faces DBAccuracy0.605SR-K-means
Image ClusteringYouTube Faces DBNMI0.806SR-K-means
Image ClusteringMNIST-testAccuracy0.863SR-K-means
Image ClusteringMNIST-testNMI0.873SR-K-means

Related Papers

Language Integration in Fine-Tuning Multimodal Large Language Models for Image-Based Regression2025-07-20Tri-Learn Graph Fusion Network for Attributed Graph Clustering2025-07-18Neural Network-Guided Symbolic Regression for Interpretable Descriptor Discovery in Perovskite Catalysts2025-07-16Imbalanced Regression Pipeline Recommendation2025-07-16Second-Order Bounds for [0,1]-Valued Regression via Betting Loss2025-07-16Ranking Vectors Clustering: Theory and Applications2025-07-16Sparse Regression Codes exploit Multi-User Diversity without CSI2025-07-15Car Object Counting and Position Estimation via Extension of the CLIP-EBC Framework2025-07-11