Automatic selection of the number of clusters using Bayesian clustering and sparsity‐inducing priors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clustering is a ubiquitous task in ecological and environmental sciences and multiple methods have been developed for this purpose. Because these clustering methods typically require users to a priori specify the number of groups, the standard approach is to run the algorithm for different numbers of groups and then choose the optimal number using a criterion (e.g., AIC or BIC). The problem with this approach is that it can be computationally expensive to run these clustering algorithms multiple times (i.e., for different numbers of groups) and some of these information criteria can lead to an overestimation of the number of groups. To address these concerns, we advocate for the use of sparsity-inducing priors within a Bayesian clustering framework. In particular, we highlight how the truncated stick-breaking (TSB) prior, a prior commonly adopted in Bayesian nonparametrics, can be used to simultaneously determine the number of groups and estimate model parameters for a wide range of Bayesian clustering models without requiring the fitting of multiple models. We illustrate the ability of this prior to successfully recover the true number of groups for three clustering models (two types of mixture models, applied to GPS movement data and species occurrence data, as well as the species archetype model) using simulated data in the context of movement ecology and community ecology. We then apply these models to armadillo movement data in Brazil, plant occurrence data from Alberta (Canada), and bird occurrence data from North America. We believe that many ecological and environmental sciences applications will benefit from Bayesian clustering methods with sparsity-inducing priors given the ubiquity of clustering and the associated challenge of determining the number of groups. Two R packages, EcoCluster and bayesmove, are provided that enable the straightforward fitting of these models with the TSB prior.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".