Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 4 minor 86 references

Bootstrap Deep Spectral Clustering with Optimal Transport

T0 review · 5 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read BootSC trains affinity construction, spectral embedding, and k-means in one end-to-end network, using optimal-transport-derived targets as self-supervision.

desk verdict BootSC attacks a real weakness in deep spectral clustering and the OT-bootstrap idea is plausible, but with only the abstract and intro available we can't verify the 16% NMI claim or the method's soundness. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.04200 v1 pith:CQFJM2CS submitted 2025-08-06 cs.CV cs.LG

Wengang Guo , Wei Ye , Chunchun Chen , Xin Sun , Christian Böhm , Claudia Plant , Susanto Rahardja This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.LG
keywords deepclusteringspectraloptimaltransportend-to-endlearningaffinitymatrixunsupervisedself-supervisedimage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that spectral clustering no longer needs to be split into separately optimized stages or depend on pre-trained features. The proposed BootSC trains a single network to predict pairwise affinities, spectral embeddings, and k-means assignments at once, using optimal-transport-derived target matrices to supervise its own affinity and assignment predictions in each mini-batch. The authors argue that this bootstrapped supervision plus orthogonalization of the embeddings lets the network learn a clustering-specific affinity from raw data without a pre-trained network, while staying scalable because only mini-batches are needed. If correct, the method would make spectral clustering practical for large, high-dimensional image datasets and better at separating nonconvex clusters, with a reported 16% NMI improvement over the runner-up on ImageNet-Dogs.

What carries the argument

Optimal-transport bootstrapping: in each mini-batch the model's own predicted affinity and assignment matrices are matched to doubly stochastic target matrices computed with a Sinkhorn optimal-transport solver, and these targets provide the self-supervision that steers training away from meaningless partitions. A second mechanism is a semantically-consistent orthogonal re-parameterization that constrains the embeddings to be orthogonal, playing the role of the eigenvector constraint in classical spectral clustering while remaining end-to-end differentiable.

What would settle it

Train BootSC on a dataset with known ground truth and heavily imbalanced cluster sizes, then measure NMI. Because the Sinkhorn targets tend to force balanced assignments, the model should be pushed toward equal-sized clusters; a clear drop in NMI as imbalance grows would show that the optimal-transport targets, rather than semantic signal, are steering the partition.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's discovery is that a single end-to-end network can learn the three separate pieces of spectral clustering—affinity construction, spectral embedding, and k-means grouping—by bootstrapping itself with optimal transport. In each mini-batch the network emits an affinity matrix and a cluster-assignment matrix; an optimal-transport step converts these raw predictions into cleaner target matrices, and the network is trained to move toward those targets. A semantically-consistent orthogonal re-parameterization keeps the spectral embeddings orthogonal, which sharpens discrimination. The learned affinity matrix develops a clear diagonal block structure as training proceeds

Load-bearing premise

The whole method relies on the optimal-transport targets generated from the network's own current predictions being informative; if those self-generated targets are degenerate or meaningless, the network can converge to a self-consistent but semantically wrong partition.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If BootSC works as claimed, deep spectral clustering scales to datasets too large for a full affinity matrix, since training uses only mini-batches.
  • A clustering-specific affinity can be learned from raw data without pre-trained features, removing a major source of representation bias in earlier deep spectral methods.
  • Jointly optimizing affinity, embedding, and k-means avoids the error accumulation of two-stage pipelines where one stage is frozen while the next is tuned.
  • Optimal-transport-generated targets can bootstrap more than one output matrix in the same network, suggesting a general recipe for self-supervised clustering.
  • The reported 16% NMI gain over the runner-up on ImageNet-Dogs indicates the approach is competitive with current deep clustering baselines on challenging image data.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the learned affinity matrix genuinely captures semantic similarity, it could transfer to other tasks such as semi-supervised label propagation or graph-cut segmentation—something the paper does not explore.
  • Because Sinkhorn-based targets typically favor balanced clusters, applying BootSC unchanged to heavily imbalanced data may force equal-sized partitions; an unbalanced or cost-augmented optimal-transport variant would be a natural testable extension.
  • The k-means head assumes a fixed cluster number k; a nonparametric clustering head could let the same bootstrap signal also discover the number of clusters, extending the method beyond the paper's setting.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes BootSC, a deep spectral clustering model that aims to jointly learn affinity matrix construction, spectral embedding, and k-means clustering in a single end-to-end network. Supervision is derived from optimal transport (OT) in a bootstrapped manner, and a "semantically-consistent orthogonal re-parameterization" is said to improve embedding discrimination. The abstract claims state-of-the-art clustering performance, including a 16% NMI improvement over the runner-up on ImageNet-Dogs. The submitted text, however, contains only the abstract, an introductory section, one figure caption (Fig. 1), and references; the technical method, training objective, architecture details, and experimental results are absent.

Significance. If the claimed method works as described, it would address two recognized limitations of deep spectral clustering: the disjoint pipeline of affinity construction, spectral embedding, and k-means, and the poor scalability of full affinity matrices. The use of OT-based self-supervision is timely and could be a meaningful contribution. The paper also promises publicly available code, which would aid reproducibility. However, because the submitted manuscript lacks all technical substance, the significance cannot be evaluated beyond the plausibility of the idea. The current version functions as an extended abstract, not a reviewable archival paper.

major comments (5)
  1. [Manuscript after Section I] The technical content is missing. The introduction describes Figure 2 and then the text jumps directly to the reference list; there is no model definition, no loss functions, no training algorithm, no architecture description, and no pseudo-code. Consequently, the central claim of joint end-to-end learning of affinity, spectral embedding, and k-means is an assertion rather than a derivable or checkable result. This is a load-bearing omission that prevents any technical evaluation.
  2. [Abstract and experimental claims] The claimed 16% NMI improvement over the runner-up on ImageNet-Dogs is unsupported by any table, protocol, baseline definition, metric definition, or hyperparameter setting. The only empirical evidence in the submitted text is the Fig. 1 caption, which qualitatively shows a diagonal block structure on ImageNet-10. No quantitative comparison, ablation, or statistical analysis is provided for any dataset.
  3. [Section I, OT-derived bootstrapped supervision] The described supervision is computed from the model's own mini-batch predictions, and the same network produces both the affinity matrix and the cluster assignment matrix. This raises a concrete circularity risk: a self-consistent fixed point could consist of arbitrary but balanced assignments, with the spectral-embedding/k-means stage simply rediscovering its own partition. The submitted text does not describe any mechanism (e.g., stop-gradient, target network, queue, data augmentation, or auxiliary loss) that would prevent such degenerate equilibria. This needs to be addressed explicitly with equations and a stability argument.
  4. [Section I, orthogonal re-parameterization] The "semantically-consistent orthogonal re-parameterization" is introduced only by name. There is no definition of semantic consistency, no orthogonality constraint, no optimization step, and no algorithm. It is therefore impossible to assess the claim that this technique "significantly enhances" discrimination capability.
  5. [Section I, scalability claim] The introduction asserts that mini-batch training enables scalability, but no complexity analysis, memory analysis, or large-scale experiment is provided. Since the method is said to construct an affinity matrix within a mini-batch, the quadratic cost relative to batch size should be discussed and compared with existing full-graph spectral clustering approaches.
minor comments (4)
  1. [General formatting] The header still reads "JOURNAL OF LATEX CLASS FILES, VOL. 18, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2020" though the submission is dated 2025; the template header should be updated.
  2. [Figures] Figure 2 is referenced in the Introduction but is not present in the submitted text. The manuscript also appears to jump from page 1 to the reference list at page 12, suggesting missing pages.
  3. [Footnote 1] The footnote distinguishing "bootstrap" from the statistical sense is useful, but the idiomatic sense still requires a precise description of what is being bootstrapped and how the bootstrapping is updated over training.
  4. [References] The reference list is extensive, but with the technical sections missing it is not possible to verify that all cited works are relevant or that the related-work discussion is complete.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No demonstrated circularity; method equations absent, empirical claim is externally benchmarked.

full rationale

The visible manuscript (abstract and introduction, with references and author bios) makes two load-bearing claims: (1) BootSC jointly learns affinity construction, spectral embedding, and k-means in one network; (2) the supervision for this is derived from optimal transport applied to the model's own mini-batch predictions, 'to bootstrap the affinity matrix and the cluster assignment matrix' (Abstract). This is a self-referential training setup, and without the method section one cannot rule out degenerate balanced partitions. However, circularity per the protocol requires exhibiting a specific reduction—e.g., an equation where a 'prediction' equals a fitted input by construction. No equations, loss functions, or experimental details are present in the supplied text. The only concrete empirical claim, a 16% NMI improvement on ImageNet-Dogs, is an external-benchmark result, which provides independent grounding for the method's output even though the current text does not allow verification. The self-citations in the reference list ([24], [31], [91]) are not visibly load-bearing in the supplied portions. Therefore no circular step can be demonstrated; the identified risk is a correctness/verification concern, not a demonstrated circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

None of the elements are visible in the abstract; the listed axioms are standard assumptions for deep clustering with spectral and OT components.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Spectral clustering is a valid approach for detecting nonconvex cluster structures.
    The method builds on the premise that spectral embeddings from a learned affinity matrix capture cluster structure, as cited in [12].
  • domain assumption Optimal transport assignment via Sinkhorn provides a meaningful balanced target for clustering.
    The supervision uses OT to generate assignment matrices; the method assumes this target is informative and prevents degenerate solutions.
  • domain assumption The affinity matrix can be learned from mini-batches and still approximate the global dataset structure.
    Scalability relies on mini-batch training; this assumes batch-wise affinities reflect the full dataset's cluster structure.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bootstrap Deep Spectral Clustering with Optimal Transport." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CQFJM2CS

@misc{pith2026250804200,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bootstrap Deep Spectral Clustering with Optimal Transport},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CQFJM2CS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.04200}
}
abstract

Spectral clustering is a leading clustering method. Two of its major shortcomings are the disjoint optimization process and the limited representation capacity. To address these issues, we propose a deep spectral clustering model (named BootSC), which jointly learns all stages of spectral clustering -- affinity matrix construction, spectral embedding, and $k$-means clustering -- using a single network in an end-to-end manner. BootSC leverages effective and efficient optimal-transport-derived supervision to bootstrap the affinity matrix and the cluster assignment matrix. Moreover, a semantically-consistent orthogonal re-parameterization technique is introduced to orthogonalize spectral embeddings, significantly enhancing the discrimination capability. Experimental results indicate that BootSC achieves state-of-the-art clustering performance. For example, it accomplishes a notable 16\% NMI improvement over the runner-up method on the challenging ImageNet-Dogs dataset. Our code is available at https://github.com/spdj2271/BootSC.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [18]

    Spectral clustering via ensemble deep autoencoder learning (sc-edae),

    S. Affeldt, L. Labiod, and M. Nadif, “Spectral clustering via ensemble deep autoencoder learning (sc-edae),” Pattern Recognition, 2020

    2020

  2. [19]

    Spectral clustering joint deep embedding learning by autoencoder,

    X. Ye, C. Wang, A. Imakura, and T. Sakurai, “Spectral clustering joint deep embedding learning by autoencoder,” in International Joint Conference on Neural Networks , 2021

    2021

  3. [20]

    Greedy layer-wise training of deep networks,

    Y . Bengio, P. Lamblin, D. Popovici, and H. Larochelle, “Greedy layer-wise training of deep networks,” Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems , 2006

    2006

  4. [21]

    Deep learning,

    Y . LeCun, Y . Bengio, and G. Hinton, “Deep learning,” Nature, 2015

    2015

  5. [22]

    Sinkhorn distances: Lightspeed computation of optimal transport,

    M. Cuturi, “Sinkhorn distances: Lightspeed computation of optimal transport,” Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 2013

    2013

  6. [23]

    A generalized solution of the orthogonal procrustes problem,

    P. H. Sch ¨onemann, “A generalized solution of the orthogonal procrustes problem,” Psychometrika, 1966

    1966

  7. [24]

    Deep embedded k-means clustering,

    W. Guo, K. Lin, and W. Ye, “Deep embedded k-means clustering,” in IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops , 2021

    work page 2021

  8. [25]

    Deep subspace clus- tering networks,

    P. Ji, T. Zhang, H. Li, M. Salzmann, and I. Reid, “Deep subspace clus- tering networks,” Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2017

    work page 2017

Show all 86 references
  1. [26]

    Deep multi-view subspace clustering with unified and discriminative learning,

    Q. Wang, J. Cheng, Q. Gao, G. Zhao, and L. Jiao, “Deep multi-view subspace clustering with unified and discriminative learning,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , 2021

    2021

  2. [27]

    Projective multiple kernel subspace clustering,

    M. Sun, S. Wang, P. Zhang, X. Liu, X. Guo, S. Zhou, and E. Zhu, “Projective multiple kernel subspace clustering,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2022

    2022

  3. [28]

    Joint unsupervised learning of deep representations and image clusters,

    J. Yang, D. Parikh, and D. Batra, “Joint unsupervised learning of deep representations and image clusters,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2016

    2016

  4. [29]

    Acoustic scene clustering using joint optimization of deep embedding learning and clustering iteration,

    Y . Li, M. Liu, W. Wang, Y . Zhang, and Q. He, “Acoustic scene clustering using joint optimization of deep embedding learning and clustering iteration,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , 2020

    2020

  5. [30]

    Network embedding via deep prediction model,

    X. Sun, Z. Song, Y . Yu, J. Dong, C. Plant, and C. B ¨ohm, “Network embedding via deep prediction model,” IEEE Transactions on Big Data, 2022

    2022

  6. [31]

    Deep spectral clustering via joint spectral embedding and kmeans,

    W. Guo and W. Ye, “Deep spectral clustering via joint spectral embedding and kmeans,” in IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics , 2024

    2024

  7. [32]

    Nearest neighbor matching for deep clustering,

    Z. Dang, C. Deng, X. Yang, K. Wei, and H. Huang, “Nearest neighbor matching for deep clustering,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2021

    2021

  8. [33]

    Deep comprehensive correlation mining for image clustering,

    J. Wu, K. Long, F. Wang, C. Qian, C. Li, Z. Lin, and H. Zha, “Deep comprehensive correlation mining for image clustering,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2019

    2019

  9. [34]

    Scan: Learning to classify images without labels,

    W. Van Gansbeke, S. Vandenhende, S. Georgoulis, M. Proesmans, and L. Van Gool, “Scan: Learning to classify images without labels,” in European Conference on Computer Vision , 2020

    2020

  10. [35]

    Invariant information clustering for unsupervised image classification and segmentation,

    X. Ji, J. F. Henriques, and A. Vedaldi, “Invariant information clustering for unsupervised image classification and segmentation,” in IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , 2019

    2019

  11. [36]

    Consistent multiple graph embedding for multi-view clustering,

    Y . Wang, D. Chang, Z. Fu, and Y . Zhao, “Consistent multiple graph embedding for multi-view clustering,” IEEE Transactions on Multime- dia, 2023

    2023

  12. [37]

    Learning deep generative clustering via mutual information maximization,

    X. Yang, J. Yan, Y . Cheng, and Y . Zhang, “Learning deep generative clustering via mutual information maximization,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems , 2022

    2022

  13. [38]

    A simple frame- work for contrastive learning of visual representations,

    T. Chen, S. Kornblith, M. Norouzi, and G. Hinton, “A simple frame- work for contrastive learning of visual representations,” inInternational Conference on Machine Learning , 2020

    2020

  14. [39]

    Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning,

    K. He, H. Fan, Y . Wu, S. Xie, and R. Girshick, “Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2020

    2020

  15. [40]

    Contrastive clustering,

    Y . Li, P. Hu, Z. Liu, D. Peng, J. T. Zhou, and X. Peng, “Contrastive clustering,” in AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , 2021

    2021

  16. [41]

    You never cluster alone,

    Y . Shen, Z. Shen, M. Wang, J. Qin, P. Torr, and L. Shao, “You never cluster alone,” Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2021

    2021

  17. [42]

    Contrastive multi-view learning for 3d shape clustering,

    B. Peng, G. Lin, J. Lei, T. Qin, X. Cao, and N. Ling, “Contrastive multi-view learning for 3d shape clustering,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2024

    2024

  18. [43]

    Self-weighted contrastive fusion for deep multi-view clustering,

    S. Wu, Y . Zheng, Y . Ren, J. He, X. Pu, S. Huang, Z. Hao, and L. He, “Self-weighted contrastive fusion for deep multi-view clustering,”IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , 2024

    2024

  19. [44]

    Image clustering conditioned on text criteria,

    S. Kwon, J. Park, M. Kim, J. Cho, E. K. Ryu, and K. Lee, “Image clustering conditioned on text criteria,” in International Conference on Learning Representations, 2024

    2024

  20. [45]

    Clusterllm: Large language models as a guide for text clustering,

    Y . Zhang, Z. Wang, and J. Shang, “Clusterllm: Large language models as a guide for text clustering,” in Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2023

    2023

  21. [46]

    Large language models enable few-shot clustering,

    V . Viswanathan, K. Gashteovski, C. Lawrence, T. Wu, and G. Neubig, “Large language models enable few-shot clustering,” Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics , 2024

    2024

  22. [47]

    Gpt-4 technical report,

    J. Achiam, S. Adler, S. Agarwal, L. Ahmad, I. Akkaya, F. L. Aleman, D. Almeida, J. Altenschmidt, S. Altman, S. Anadkat et al. , “Gpt-4 technical report,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  23. [48]

    New spectral methods for ratio cut partitioning and clustering,

    L. Hagen and A. B. Kahng, “New spectral methods for ratio cut partitioning and clustering,” IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems , 1992

    1992

  24. [49]

    A tutorial on spectral clustering,

    U. V on Luxburg, “A tutorial on spectral clustering,” Statistics and computing, 2007

    2007

  25. [50]

    Deep spectral clustering with constrained laplacian rank,

    X. Li, T. Wei, and Y . Zhao, “Deep spectral clustering with constrained laplacian rank,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2024

    2024

  26. [51]

    Spectral clustering with adaptive neighbors for deep learning,

    Y . Zhao and X. Li, “Spectral clustering with adaptive neighbors for deep learning,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2023

    2023

  27. [52]

    Dynamic affinity graph construction for spectral clustering using multiple fea- tures,

    Z. Li, F. Nie, X. Chang, Y . Yang, C. Zhang, and N. Sebe, “Dynamic affinity graph construction for spectral clustering using multiple fea- tures,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems , 2018

    2018

  28. [53]

    Affinity aggregation for spectral clustering,

    H.-C. Huang, Y .-Y . Chuang, and C.-S. Chen, “Affinity aggregation for spectral clustering,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2012

    2012

  29. [54]

    Consensus affinity graph learning for multiple kernel clustering,

    Z. Ren, S. X. Yang, Q. Sun, and T. Wang, “Consensus affinity graph learning for multiple kernel clustering,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 2020

    2020

  30. [55]

    Learning a joint affinity graph for multiview subspace clustering,

    C. Tang, X. Zhu, X. Liu, M. Li, P. Wang, C. Zhang, and L. Wang, “Learning a joint affinity graph for multiview subspace clustering,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , 2019

    2019

  31. [56]

    Self-tuning spectral clustering,

    L. Zelnik-Manor and P. Perona, “Self-tuning spectral clustering,” Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems , 2004

    2004

  32. [57]

    Constructing robust affinity graphs for spectral clustering,

    X. Zhu, C. Change Loy, and S. Gong, “Constructing robust affinity graphs for spectral clustering,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2014

    2014

  33. [58]

    Random forests,

    L. Breiman, “Random forests,” Machine learning, 2001

    2001

  34. [59]

    Spectral grouping using the nystrom method,

    C. Fowlkes, S. Belongie, F. Chung, and J. Malik, “Spectral grouping using the nystrom method,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2004

    2004

  35. [60]

    Power iteration clustering,

    F. Lin and W. W. Cohen, “Power iteration clustering,” in International Conference on Machine Learning , 2010

    2010

  36. [61]

    Fuse: Full spectral clus- tering,

    W. Ye, S. Goebl, C. Plant, and C. B ¨ohm, “Fuse: Full spectral clus- tering,” in ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining , 2016

    2016

  37. [62]

    Large scale spectral clustering via landmark- based sparse representation,

    D. Cai and X. Chen, “Large scale spectral clustering via landmark- based sparse representation,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 2014

    2014

  38. [63]

    Large graph cluster- ing with simultaneous spectral embedding and discretization,

    Z. Wang, Z. Li, R. Wang, F. Nie, and X. Li, “Large graph cluster- ing with simultaneous spectral embedding and discretization,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , 2020

    2020

  39. [64]

    Mini-batch spectral clustering,

    Y . Han and M. Filippone, “Mini-batch spectral clustering,” in Interna- tional Joint Conference on Neural Networks , 2017

    2017

  40. [65]

    Multiclass spectral clustering,

    S. X. Yu and J. Shi, “Multiclass spectral clustering,” in IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , 2003

    2003

  41. [66]

    Spectral rotation versus k-means in spectral clustering,

    J. Huang, F. Nie, and H. Huang, “Spectral rotation versus k-means in spectral clustering,” in AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , 2013

    2013

  42. [67]

    Scalable normalized cut with improved spectral rotation

    X. Chen, F. Nie, J. Z. Huang, and M. Yang, “Scalable normalized cut with improved spectral rotation.” in International Joint Conference on Artificial IntelligenceI, 2017

    2017

  43. [68]

    Simple, direct and efficient multi- way spectral clustering,

    A. Damle, V . Minden, and L. Ying, “Simple, direct and efficient multi- way spectral clustering,” Information and Inference: A Journal of the IMA, 2019

    2019

  44. [69]

    Fast opti- mization of spectral embedding and improved spectral rotation,

    Z. Wang, X. Dai, P. Zhu, R. Wang, X. Li, and F. Nie, “Fast opti- mization of spectral embedding and improved spectral rotation,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering , 2021

    2021

  45. [70]

    A unified framework for discrete spectral clustering,

    Y . Yang, S. Fumin, H. Zi, and H. T. Shen, “A unified framework for discrete spectral clustering,” in International Joint Conference on Artificial IntelligenceI, 2016

    2016

  46. [71]

    Unified spectral clustering with optimal graph,

    Z. Kang, C. Peng, Q. Cheng, and Z. Xu, “Unified spectral clustering with optimal graph,” in AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , 2018

    2018

  47. [72]

    Tensor low- rank graph embedding and learning for one-step incomplete multi-view clustering,

    M. Wan, J. Zhu, C. Sun, Z. Yang, J. Yin, and G. Yang, “Tensor low- rank graph embedding and learning for one-step incomplete multi-view clustering,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , 2024. JOURNAL OF LATEX CLASS FILES, VOL. 18, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2020 13

    2024

  48. [73]

    Improved normalized cut for multi-view clustering,

    G. Zhong and C.-M. Pun, “Improved normalized cut for multi-view clustering,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intel- ligence, 2021

    2021

  49. [74]

    Learning deep representations for graph clustering,

    F. Tian, B. Gao, Q. Cui, E. Chen, and T.-Y . Liu, “Learning deep representations for graph clustering,” in AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2014

    2014

  50. [75]

    Optimal transport for domain adaptation,

    R. Flamary, N. Courty, D. Tuia, and A. Rakotomamonjy, “Optimal transport for domain adaptation,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Anal- ysis and Machine Intelligence , 2016

    2016

  51. [76]

    Self-labelling via simultane- ous clustering and representation learning,

    Y . Asano, C. Rupprecht, and A. Vedaldi, “Self-labelling via simultane- ous clustering and representation learning,” in International Conference on Learning Representations , 2019

    2019

  52. [77]

    Unsupervised learning of visual features by contrasting cluster assign- ments,

    M. Caron, I. Misra, J. Mairal, P. Goyal, P. Bojanowski, and A. Joulin, “Unsupervised learning of visual features by contrasting cluster assign- ments,” Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2020

    2020

  53. [78]

    Ota: Optimal transport as- signment for object detection,

    Z. Ge, S. Liu, Z. Li, O. Yoshie, and J. Sun, “Ota: Optimal transport as- signment for object detection,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2021

    2021

  54. [79]

    A random walks view of spectral segmentation,

    M. Meil ˘a and J. Shi, “A random walks view of spectral segmentation,” in International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics , 2001

    2001

  55. [80]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision,

    A. Radford, J. W. Kim, C. Hallacy, A. Ramesh, G. Goh, S. Agarwal, G. Sastry, A. Askell, P. Mishkin, J. Clark et al., “Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision,” in International Conference on Machine Learning , 2021

    2021

  56. [81]

    Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective function algorithms,

    J. C. Bezdek, “Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective function algorithms,” in Advanced Applications in Pattern Recognition , 1981

    1981

  57. [82]

    Estimating or propagating gradients through stochastic neurons for conditional computation,

    Y . Bengio, N. L ´eonard, and A. Courville, “Estimating or propagating gradients through stochastic neurons for conditional computation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1308.3432 , 2013

    2013 arXiv

  58. [83]

    Exploring simple siamese representation learn- ing,

    X. Chen and K. He, “Exploring simple siamese representation learn- ing,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recog- nition, 2021

    2021

  59. [84]

    Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images,

    A. Krizhevsky, G. Hinton et al., “Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images,” University of Toronto, 2012

    2012

  60. [85]

    Tiny imagenet visual recognition challenge,

    Y . Le and X. Yang, “Tiny imagenet visual recognition challenge,” CS 231N, 2015

    2015

  61. [86]

    Divclust: Controlling diversity in deep clustering,

    I. M. Metaxas, G. Tzimiropoulos, and I. Patras, “Divclust: Controlling diversity in deep clustering,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2023

    2023

  62. [87]

    Least squares quantization in pcm,

    S. Lloyd, “Least squares quantization in pcm,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 1982

    1982

  63. [88]

    Agglomerative clustering using the concept of mutual nearest neighbourhood,

    K. C. Gowda and G. Krishna, “Agglomerative clustering using the concept of mutual nearest neighbourhood,” Pattern Recognition, 1978

    1978

  64. [89]

    Locality preserving nonnegative matrix factorization,

    D. Cai, X. He, X. Wang, H. Bao, and J. Han, “Locality preserving nonnegative matrix factorization,” in International Joint Conference on Artificial IntelligenceI, 2009

    2009

  65. [90]

    Graph contrastive clustering,

    H. Zhong, J. Wu, C. Chen, J. Huang, M. Deng, L. Nie, Z. Lin, and X.-S. Hua, “Graph contrastive clustering,” in IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , 2021

    2021

  66. [91]

    Wasserstein em- bedding learning for deep clustering: A generative approach,

    J. Cai, Y . Zhang, S. Wang, J. Fan, and W. Guo, “Wasserstein em- bedding learning for deep clustering: A generative approach,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , 2024

    2024

  67. [92]

    Deep semantic clustering by partition confidence maximisation,

    J. Huang, S. Gong, and X. Zhu, “Deep semantic clustering by partition confidence maximisation,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2020

    2020

  68. [93]

    Hcsc: Hierarchical contrastive selective coding,

    Y . Guo, M. Xu, J. Li, B. Ni, X. Zhu, Z. Sun, and Y . Xu, “Hcsc: Hierarchical contrastive selective coding,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2022

    2022

  69. [94]

    Clustering-friendly representation learning via instance discrimination and feature decorrelation,

    Y . Tao, K. Takagi, and K. Nakata, “Clustering-friendly representation learning via instance discrimination and feature decorrelation,” in International Conference on Learning Representations , 2021

    2021

  70. [95]

    Deep- clue: Enhanced deep clustering via multi-layer ensembles in neural networks,

    D. Huang, D.-H. Chen, X. Chen, C.-D. Wang, and J.-H. Lai, “Deep- clue: Enhanced deep clustering via multi-layer ensembles in neural networks,” IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence, 2023

    2023

  71. [96]

    Semantic spectral clustering with contrastive learning and neighbor mining,

    N. Wang, X. Ye, J. Zhao, and Q. Wang, “Semantic spectral clustering with contrastive learning and neighbor mining,” Neural Processing Letters, 2024

    2024

  72. [97]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition,

    K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, “Deep residual learning for image recognition,” in IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2016

    2016

  73. [98]

    Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks,

    X. Glorot and Y . Bengio, “Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks,” in International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics , 2010

    2010

  74. [99]

    Sgdr: Stochastic gradient descent with warm restarts,

    I. Loshchilov and F. Hutter, “Sgdr: Stochastic gradient descent with warm restarts,” in International Conference on Learning Representa- tions, 2016

    2016

  75. [100]

    Pytorch: An imper- ative style, high-performance deep learning library,

    A. Paszke, S. Gross, F. Massa, A. Lerer, J. Bradbury, G. Chanan, T. Killeen, Z. Lin, N. Gimelshein, L. Antiga et al., “Pytorch: An imper- ative style, high-performance deep learning library,”Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems , 2019

    2019

  76. [101]

    Information theoretic measures for clusterings comparison: is a correction for chance necessary?

    N. X. Vinh, J. Epps, and J. Bailey, “Information theoretic measures for clusterings comparison: is a correction for chance necessary?” in International Conference on Machine Learning , 2009

    2009

  77. [102]

    Comparing partitions,

    L. Hubert and P. Arabie, “Comparing partitions,” Journal of classifi- cation, 1985

    1985

  78. [103]

    Dis- placement interpolation using lagrangian mass transport,

    N. Bonneel, M. Van De Panne, S. Paris, and W. Heidrich, “Dis- placement interpolation using lagrangian mass transport,” in ACM Transactions on Graphics, 2011. Wengang Guo is a PhD student in the College of Electronic and Information Engineering at Tongji University, Shanghai, ...

    2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.