Skip Navigation

Biometrika 1971 58(1):91-104; doi:10.1093/biomet/58.1.91
© 1971 by Biometrika Trust
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by FISHER, L.
Right arrow Articles by NESS, J. W. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Admissible clustering procedures

LLOYD FISHER and JOHN W. VAN NESS

University of Washington

Since it is usually impossible to determine a ‘best’ clustering procedure, admissible clustering procedures are suggested. Let A denote some property which should be satisfied by any reasonable procedure either in general or when used in a special application. Any procedure which satisfies A is called A -admissible. Nine admissibility conditions are defined and several standard clustering methods are compared with them.

Key Words: Cluster analysis • Pattern recognition • Admissibility • Admissible decision rules • Hierarchical clustering procedures


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
A. Hammerli, R. Gattiker, and R. Weyermann
Conflict and Cooperation in an Actors' Network of Chechnya Based on Event Data
Journal of Conflict Resolution, April 1, 2006; 50(2): 159 - 175.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 SIMULATIONHome page
B. Pinkowski
CLUSTERT -- A simulation-based expert
SIMULATION, May 1, 1989; 52(5): 179 - 185.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
G. W. Milligan and M. C. Cooper
Methodology Review: Clustering Methods
Applied Psychological Measurement, December 1, 1987; 11(4): 329 - 354.
[Abstract]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.