ML Interview Q Series: In which types of situations does k-means clustering perform poorly?

📚 Browse the full ML Interview series here.

Comprehensive Explanation

k-Means clustering partitions data points into k groups by minimizing the within-cluster sum of squares. It repeatedly assigns each data point to its closest centroid and updates these centroids based on the assignments. The core mathematical objective function of k-Means is often expressed as:

Here, i is the cluster index from 1 to k, C_{i} is the set of data points assigned to cluster i, x is a data point in cluster i, and \mu_{i} denotes the centroid of the ith cluster. k-Means aims to find cluster assignments and corresponding centroids that minimize this sum of squared Euclidean distances.

Despite its widespread popularity, k-Means has several limitations that can result in unsatisfactory clustering outcomes:

Sensitivity to Cluster Shape and Non-Convex Distributions

k-Means assumes that clusters are roughly spherical and separated in such a way that each point is closest to one centroid. If the underlying clusters have complex shapes, such as crescent or donut-like structures, k-Means will tend to force these points into spherical clusters. This usually leads to incorrect boundaries when clusters are non-convex or elongated.

Different Cluster Sizes and Densities

When the dataset has clusters of varying densities or sizes, k-Means can yield misleading clusters. Because it always tries to minimize average distance to the centroid, smaller or denser clusters might be forced to merge or get split incorrectly. Large or sparse clusters might influence the centroids disproportionately, causing the algorithm to underfit the smaller groups.

Susceptibility to Outliers

k-Means uses Euclidean distance, making it very sensitive to extreme outlier values that can pull the centroid in their direction. A single outlier can shift the centroid significantly away from most of the points in the cluster, reducing clustering quality.

Necessity of Specifying k in Advance

In practice, determining the correct number of clusters (k) can be non-trivial. If k is not chosen carefully, the resulting partitions might be suboptimal. Methods like the Elbow method, Silhouette scores, or domain knowledge can help select k, but they are not foolproof.

Sensitivity to Initialization

The initial placement of cluster centroids can affect the final solution. Although algorithms like k-means++ help reduce the impact of bad initialization, certain datasets can still lead to local optima if the initial centroid choices are unfortunate.

Scale Dependence

k-Means relies on Euclidean distance, so variables with larger numeric ranges dominate the distance metrics. If features are not properly scaled, the algorithm might produce distorted clusters. Proper normalization or standardization of features is critical before running k-Means.

Unbalanced Cluster Sizes

If the dataset is heavily imbalanced—containing one large cluster and several small clusters—k-Means might favor the large cluster at the expense of smaller ones. Distances for points in smaller clusters could end up being closer to a centroid that was pulled toward the larger cluster, leading to misclassifications.

Code Example (Python)

Below is a simple demonstration of k-Means in Python using scikit-learn. This snippet illustrates how an imbalanced dataset can cause k-Means to struggle:

import numpy as np
from sklearn.cluster import KMeans
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

# Create an imbalanced dataset
# One large cluster centered at (0, 0) and a small cluster near (5,5)
X_large = np.random.randn(500, 2)
X_small = 0.3 * np.random.randn(20, 2) + np.array([5, 5])
X = np.vstack((X_large, X_small))

kmeans = KMeans(n_clusters=2, random_state=42)
labels = kmeans.fit_predict(X)

# Plotting the results
plt.scatter(X[:,0], X[:,1], c=labels, cmap='viridis', alpha=0.5)
plt.scatter(kmeans.cluster_centers_[:,0], kmeans.cluster_centers_[:,1],
            color='red', marker='X', s=200)
plt.title("k-Means Clustering on an Imbalanced Dataset")
plt.show()

In the above code, k-Means is asked to find two clusters in an imbalanced dataset. Often it will identify the large cluster accurately but may incorrectly interpret the smaller cluster if the centroids are not placed appropriately, or if outliers exist within the smaller set.

How to Address These Limitations

Various adaptations of k-Means or different clustering methods can overcome these issues. Using techniques such as DBSCAN or Mean Shift can help with data that has non-convex structures or varying densities. Incorporating specialized initialization strategies like k-means++ can mitigate poor initialization. Employing robust distance metrics or outlier-handling strategies may help reduce the impact of outliers.

Potential Follow-Up Questions

What are common heuristics to determine the correct value of k?

One well-known approach is the Elbow method, where you plot the sum of squared distances from each point to its assigned centroid against k. You then look for a “bend” or “elbow” in the plot where the rate of decrease dramatically diminishes. Another method is the Silhouette score, which measures how similar a point is to its own cluster compared to other clusters. Domain knowledge also plays a big role in deciding k, particularly for specialized datasets.

Could distance metrics other than Euclidean help k-Means work better?

Yes, but the standard k-Means algorithm inherently uses Euclidean distance to compute centroids (arithmetic mean). If you switch to other distances (like Manhattan or cosine), you need variants such as k-Medians or k-Medoids. k-Medoids, for instance, can be more robust to outliers by selecting actual data points as cluster centers and allowing more flexible distance metrics.

How do we handle initialization problems in k-Means?

One approach is multiple restarts: running k-Means with different random initializations and selecting the best outcome. Another popular technique is k-means++, which carefully chooses initial centroid seeds to spread them out. These strategies reduce the chances of getting stuck in poor local optima.

Is standardization of features always necessary for k-Means?

k-Means is sensitive to feature scaling because variables with large ranges can dominate the distance metric. Standardizing features to have zero mean and unit variance is often recommended. However, whether it is strictly necessary depends on the domain context and the nature of the features. If all features are already in similar numeric ranges or their distribution is uniform, then additional standardization may be optional.

Are there clustering methods better suited for non-spherical clusters?

Yes, alternative methods like DBSCAN and Mean Shift excel in cases of arbitrary cluster shapes or varying densities. These methods do not require specifying k, and they adapt to the local density of points to form clusters. Hierarchical clustering can also be used to reveal nested structures in data.

By understanding k-Means’ assumptions and the nature of the dataset, one can determine whether to use k-Means directly or opt for a different clustering algorithm more suited to the data’s peculiarities.