ML Interview Q Series: In which situations might it be preferable to apply segmentation instead of clustering?
📚 Browse the full ML Interview series here.
Comprehensive Explanation
Segmentation and clustering are both methods for dividing data into groups, but they are driven by different motivations and approaches. Segmentation typically starts with a specific business or domain-driven objective. You already have some predefined criteria or goal that dictates how you should group your data. Clustering, on the other hand, is a purely data-driven process that seeks to discover inherent groupings in the data without any predefined notion of what those groups might represent.
Segmentation often arises when you want to place data points into known, meaningful “segments” that reflect real-world or domain-specific categories. An example is marketing segmentation, where you define segments based on demographic attributes or purchasing behavior. You might already know you want to categorize your customers into “high-value,” “medium-value,” and “low-value” segments according to some well-defined metric like lifetime value. In contrast, clustering algorithms (like k-means, DBSCAN, or hierarchical clustering) do not rely on such predefined segments. They simply group data points that look similar to each other, according to some measure of distance or density.
Segmentation is particularly useful when:
You have domain expertise or business rules guiding how to group data (e.g., specific thresholds on features).
You need interpretable, stable groupings of data that reflect real-world actions or decisions you plan to take with those segments.
You are already aware of relevant classes or categories and want to place each instance into one of these categories.
Clustering is appropriate when:
You do not have a prior notion of how many groups exist or what those groups should represent.
You want to discover hidden structures within your data based purely on patterns (e.g., geographic clusters, behavioral clusters).
Example of a Clustering Objective Function
When discussing clustering methods, a common approach is the k-means algorithm, whose objective function is often expressed as the sum of squared distances between data points and their respective cluster centers (centroids).
In this formula, K is the number of clusters, C_k is the set of points that belong to cluster k, x is any data point, and µ_k is the centroid (mean) of cluster k. The goal is to minimize J by finding the optimal assignment of points to clusters and the best cluster centroids.
In contrast, segmentation typically does not attempt to optimize such a distance-based objective function. Instead, it leverages known thresholds, rules, or criteria that classify data into a predefined structure.
Potential Follow-up Questions
What distinguishes segmentation from simply applying supervised classification?
Segmentation can look like classification if you already have domain labels or categories in mind. However, supervised classification requires labeled data for training and typically focuses on predicting these labels for new examples. Segmentation may not always involve labeled data. You might simply define segments based on certain ranges of features or domain-driven thresholds. In other words, segmentation can be more of a direct rule-based partition rather than a learned decision boundary.
Additionally, segmentation is often used for descriptive purposes (understanding specific groups) rather than predictive tasks. You may not aim to predict a label for a new data point but to split the existing dataset for marketing strategies, resource allocation, or personalization.
Can clustering be used to create segments?
Absolutely. Clustering results can be interpreted as segments, especially if you label each cluster with an interpretable description and treat them as meaningful categories. However, because clustering is unsupervised and data-driven, the discovered clusters may not align exactly with predefined business criteria. Sometimes, the domain-specific meaning might be lost if the clusters do not correspond to real-world concepts or actionable groups.
One approach is to perform clustering, analyze the resulting clusters, and then redefine or rename them based on business logic. This is a hybrid approach between pure data-driven clustering and purely domain-defined segmentation.
In practice, how do you decide whether to use segmentation or clustering?
The choice depends primarily on your objective:
If you have domain knowledge indicating exactly how data should be grouped or if business experts already know what segments are actionable, segmentation is often the best route.
If you are exploring your data and you are unsure how many groups exist or which features best separate them, clustering is an excellent exploratory approach.
You can also employ a combination. For instance, you might segment users by region and then cluster them within each region to discover subgroups.
What are some pitfalls when using segmentation or clustering?
With segmentation, a common pitfall is over-simplifying the data if you rely solely on rigid business rules that may not fully capture the subtleties in your features. You risk ignoring clusters or patterns that exist beyond your predefined segments.
With clustering, you can encounter issues like difficulty in choosing the number of clusters, sensitivity to initialization or hyperparameters, and results that are not easily interpretable for business stakeholders. You might also discover clusters that are mathematically sound but have no meaningful interpretation.
Could segmentation and clustering be combined?
Yes. A practical workflow might be:
Use a segmentation approach to partition the data into broad categories that are important from a business standpoint (e.g., user types, product lines, geographies).
Within each segment, apply clustering to reveal finer substructures or micro-segments that might indicate new strategies or product recommendations.
This way, you respect the top-level business constraints while still discovering finer-grained, data-driven patterns within each segment.
Are there scenarios where segmentation might be less appropriate?
If there are no clear, predefined categories or if you lack any business logic to justify the segmentation boundaries, forcing a segmentation might lead to arbitrary groupings. For example, segmenting customers into “low spend,” “medium spend,” and “high spend” segments with fixed thresholds could fail to capture intermediate or multi-dimensional behaviors. In such cases, a clustering approach might reveal more nuanced groupings.
By considering these points, you gain clarity on whether segmentation or clustering is the best method for your particular situation and how to combine them when needed.