2013
DOI: 10.1007/s10994-013-5393-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Greedy learning of latent tree models for multidimensional clustering

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
38
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
38
0
Order By: Relevance
“…All clustering-based methods rely on two key points: grouping variables to identify new latent variables and constructing models in a hierarchical manner using a bottom-up strategy. Three types of structures have been studied: HLCMs via the bridged-islands (BI) algorithm [13], binary forests (in which each tree node can have at most two children) via the BIN-G and BIN-A algorithms [16], and non-binary forests (in which each tree node has no restrictions on the number of children) via the CFHLC algorithm [17]. These algorithms are all limited to work with discrete data.…”
Section: A Latent Tree Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…All clustering-based methods rely on two key points: grouping variables to identify new latent variables and constructing models in a hierarchical manner using a bottom-up strategy. Three types of structures have been studied: HLCMs via the bridged-islands (BI) algorithm [13], binary forests (in which each tree node can have at most two children) via the BIN-G and BIN-A algorithms [16], and non-binary forests (in which each tree node has no restrictions on the number of children) via the CFHLC algorithm [17]. These algorithms are all limited to work with discrete data.…”
Section: A Latent Tree Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, they allow for exact probabilistic inference in linear time [3]. For this reason, LTMs have proven to be valuable in many areas, such as classification [4]- [6], topic detection [7], probabilistic inference [8] and cluster analysis [9]- [13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Instead, algorithms are evaluated empirically using held-out likelihood. It has been shown that, on real-world datasets, better models can be obtained using methods developed in this setting than using those developed in the first setting [26]. The reason is that, although the assumption of the first setting is reasonable for data from domains such as phylogeny, it is not reasonable for other types of data such as text data and survey data.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The state-of-the-art in this direction is an algorithm named EAST [25]. It has been shown [26] to find better models that alternative algorithms such as BIN [39] and CLRG [24]. However, it does not scale up.…”
Section: Learning Flat Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Extensive empirical studies have been conducted where the different algorithms are compared in terms of the BIC scores of the models they obtain and running time [8,9]. The experiments indicate that the EAST (Extension-Adjustment-Simplification-until-Termination) algorithm [10] finds the best models on data sets with dozens to around one hundred observed variables, while the BI (Bridged-Islands) algorithm [9] finds the best models on data sets with hundreds to around one thousand observed variables. On data sets with dozens to around one hundred variables, BI is much faster than EAST, while the models it obtains are sometimes inferior.…”
Section: Latent Tree Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%