de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean
English
 
Help Guide Disclaimer Contact us Login
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Conference Paper

A PAC-Bayesian Analysis of Co-clustering, Graph Clustering, and Pairwise Clustering

MPS-Authors
http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons84206

Seldin,  Y
Department Empirical Inference, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

Locator
There are no locators available
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts available
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Seldin, Y. (2010). A PAC-Bayesian Analysis of Co-clustering, Graph Clustering, and Pairwise Clustering. In ICML 2010 Workshop on Social Analytics: Learning from human interactions (pp. 1-5).


Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-BF92-2
Abstract
We review briefly the PAC-Bayesian analysis of co-clustering (Seldin and Tishby, 2008, 2009, 2010), which provided generalization guarantees and regularization terms absent in the preceding formulations of this problem and achieved state-of-the-art prediction results in MovieLens collaborative filtering task. Inspired by this analysis we formulate weighted graph clustering1 as a prediction problem: given a subset of edge weights we analyze the ability of graph clustering to predict the remaining edge weights. This formulation enables practical and theoretical comparison of different approaches to graph clustering as well as comparison of graph clustering with other possible ways to model the graph. Following the lines of (Seldin and Tishby, 2010) we derive PAC-Bayesian generalization bounds for graph clustering. The bounds show that graph clustering should optimize a trade-off between empirical data fit and the mutual information that clusters preserve on the graph nodes. A similar trade-off derived from information-theoretic considerations was already shown to produce state-of-the-art results in practice (Slonim et al., 2005; Yom-Tov and Slonim, 2009). This paper supports the empirical evidence by providing a better theoretical foundation, suggesting formal generalization guarantees, and offering a more accurate way to deal with finite sample issues.