Application of K-tree to document clustering

Digital collections are growing exponentially in size as the information age takes a firm grip on all aspects of society. As a result Information Retrieval (IR) has become an increasingly important area of research. It promises to provide new and more effective ways for users to find information relevant to their search intentions. Document clustering is one of the many tools in the IR toolbox and is far from being perfected. It groups documents that share common features. This grouping allows a user to quickly identify relevant information. If these groups are misleading then valuable information can accidentally be ignored. There- fore, the study and analysis of the quality of document clustering is important. With more and more digital information available, the performance of these algorithms is also of interest. An algorithm with a time complexity of O(n2) can quickly become impractical when clustering a corpus containing millions of documents. Therefore, the investigation of algorithms and data structures to perform clustering in an efficient manner is vital to its success as an IR tool. Document classification is another tool frequently used in the IR field. It predicts categories of new documents based on an existing database of (doc- ument, category) pairs. Support Vector Machines (SVM) have been found to be effective when classifying text documents. As the algorithms for classifica- tion are both efficient and of high quality, the largest gains can be made from improvements to representation. Document representations are vital for both clustering and classification. Representations exploit the content and structure of documents. Dimensionality reduction can improve the effectiveness of existing representations in terms of quality and run-time performance. Research into these areas is another way to improve the efficiency and quality of clustering and classification results. Evaluating document clustering is a difficult task. Intrinsic measures of quality such as distortion only indicate how well an algorithm minimised a sim- ilarity function in a particular vector space. Intrinsic comparisons are inherently limited by the given representation and are not comparable between different representations. Extrinsic measures of quality compare a clustering solution to a “ground truth” solution. This allows comparison between different approaches. As the “ground truth” is created by humans it can suffer from the fact that not every human interprets a topic in the same manner. Whether a document belongs to a particular topic or not can be subjective.