Skip to main content
Log in

Weak hierarchies associated with similarity measures—An additive clustering technique

  • Published:
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A new and apparently rather useful and natural concept in cluster analysis is studied: given a similarity measure on a set of objects, a sub-set is regarded as a cluster if any two objectsa, b inside this sub-set have greater similarity than any third object outside has to at least one ofa, b. These clusters then form a closure system which can be described as a hypergraph without triangles. Conversely, given such a system, one may attach some weight to each cluster and then compose a similarity measure additively, by letting the similarity of a pair be the sum of weights of the clusters containing that particular pair. The original clusters can be reconstructed from the obtained similarity measure. This clustering model is thus located between the general additive clustering model of Shepard and Arabie (1979) and the standard hierarchical model. Potential applications include fitting dendrograms with few additional nonnested clusters and simultaneous representation of some families of multiple dendrograms (in particular, two-dendrogram solutions), as well as assisting the search for phylogenetic relationships by proposing a somewhat larger system of possibly relevant “family groups”, from which an appropriate choice (based on additional insight or individual preferences) remains to be made.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature

  • Abbott, L. A., F. A. Bisby and D. J. Rogers. 1985.Taxonomic Analysis in Biology. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anstee, R. P. 1980. “Properties of (0, 1)-Matrices with no Triangles”.J. Combinatorial Theor. A29, 186–198.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Arabie, P. and J. D. Carroll. 1980. “MAPCLUS: A Mathematical Programming Approach to Fitting the ADCLUS Model”.Psychometrika 45, 211–235.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • ——, W. DeSarbo and J. Wind. 1981. “Overlapping Clustering: A New Method for Product Positioning”.J. Marketing Res,18, 310–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandelt, H.-J. and A. Dress. 1986. “Reconstructing the Shape of a Tree from Observed Dissimilarity Data”.Adv. Appl. Math. 7, 309–343.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Arabie, P. and J. D. Carroll. (a). “A Canonical Decomposition Theory for Metrics on a Finite Set”, in preparation.

  • Barthélemy, J. P. and N. X. Luong. 1987. “Sur la Topologie d'un Arbre Phylogénétique: Aspects Théoriques, Algorithmes et Applications à l'Analyse de Données Textuelles”,Math. Sci. Hum. 100, 57–80.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Birkhoff, G. 1967.Lattice Theory (3rd edn). Providence: American Mathematical Society.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bock, H. H. 1974.Automatische Klassifikation. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer, A. E. and A. Kolen. 1980. “A Super-Balanced Hypergraph has a Nest Point”. Report ZW 146/80. Amsterdam: Mathematisch Centrum.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, K. A. and J. E. Corter. 1986. “Use of Psychometric Tools for Knowledge Acquisition: A Case Study.” InArtificial Intelligence and Statistics, W. A. Gale (Ed.), pp. 295–319. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. D. 1976. “Spatial, Non-Spatial and Hybrid Models for Scaling”.Psychometrika,41, 439–463.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • — and S. Pruzansky. 1980. “Discrete and Hybrid Scaling Models”. InSimilarity and Choice, E. D. Lantermann and H. Feger (Eds), pp. 108–139. Switzerland: Hans Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and —. 1986. “Discrete and Hybrid Models for Proximity Data”. InClassification as a Tool of Research, W. Gaul and M. Schader (Eds), pp. 47–59. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corter, J. E. 1982. “ADDTREE/P: A PASCAL Program for Fitting Additive Trees based on Sattath and Tversky's ADDTREE Algorithm”.Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation 14, 353–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and A. Tversky. 1986. “Extended Similarity Trees”,Psychometrika 51, 429–451.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Giles, R. 1978. “A Balanced Hypergraph Defined by Certain Subtrees of a Tree”.Ars Combinatoria 6, 179–183.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Golumbic, M. C. and R. E. Jamison. 1985. “The Intersection Graphs of Paths in a Tree”.J. Combinatorial Theor. B38, 8–22.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, A. D. 1987. “A Review of Hierarchical Classification”.J. R. Statist. Soc. A150, 119–137.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Mamison-Waldner, R. E. 1981. “Partition Numbers for Trees and Ordered Sets”.Pacif. J. Math. 96, 115–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1982. “A Perspective on Abstract Convexity: Classifying Alignments by Varieties”. InConvexity and Related Combinatorial Geometry, D. C. Kay and M. Breen (Eds), pp. 113–150. New York: Dekker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolen, A. 1983. “Solving Covering Problems and the Uncapacitated Plant Location Problem on Trees”,Eur. J. Oper. Res. 12, 266–278.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lassak, M. 1983. “The Rank of Product Closure Systems”,Arch. Math. 40, 186–191.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Leffers, H., J. Kjems, L. Østergaard, N. Larsen and R. A. Garrett. 1987. “Evolutionary Relationships Amongst Archaebacteria: A Comparative Study of 23S Ribosomal RNAs of a Sulphur-Dependent Extreme Thermophile, an Extreme Halophile and a Thermophilic Methanogen”.J. Molec. Biol. 195, 43–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehel, J. 1985. “A Characterization of Totally Balanced Hypergraphs”.Discrete Math. 57, 59–65.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Margush, T. and F. R. McMorris. 1981. “Consensusn-trees”.Bull. Math. Biol. 43, 239–244.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • McMorris, F. R. 1987. Proceedings of the 1st Conference of the IFCS. Aachen.

  • Mirkin, B. G. 1987. “Additive Clustering and Qualitative Factor Analysis Methods for Similarity Matrices”.J. Classification 4, 7–31.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Nei, M. 1987.Molecular Evolutionary Genetics. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Punj, G. and D. W. Stewart. 1983. “Cluster Analysis in Marketing Research: Review and Suggestions for Application”.J. Marketing Res. 20, 134–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryser, H. J. 1972. “A Fundamental Matrix Equation for Finite Sets”.Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 34, 332–336.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • — 1973. “Intersection Properties of Finite Sets”.J. Combinatorial Theor. A14, 79–92.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sattath, S. and A. Tversky. 1977. “Additive Similarity Trees”.Psychometrika,42, 319–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and —. 1987. “On the Relation Between Common and Distinctive Feature Models”.Psychol. Rev. 94, 16–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, R. N. and P. Arabie. 1979. “Additive Clustering: Representation of Similarities as Combinations of Discrete Overlapping Properties”.Psychol. Rev. 86, 87–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sibley, C. G. and J. E. Ahlquist. 1984. “The Phylogeny of the Hominoid Primates as Indicated by DNA-DNA Hybridization”.J. Molec. Evol. 20, 2–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sneath, P. H. A. and R. R. Sokal. 1973.Numerical Taxonomy. San Francisco: Freeman.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. 1977. “Features of Similarity”.Psychol. Rev. 84, 327–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van de Vel, M. 1987. “Abstract, Topological, and Uniform Convex Structures I”. Rapport nr. 325, Fac. W & I, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wille, R. 1988. “Lattices in Data Analysis: How to Draw Them with a Computer”. InAlgorithms and Order, I. Rival (Ed.). Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bandelt, H.J., Dress, A.W.M. Weak hierarchies associated with similarity measures—An additive clustering technique. Bltn Mathcal Biology 51, 133–166 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458841

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458841

Keywords

Navigation