K-Means Clustering is a popular unsupervised machine learning algorithm that groups data into a predefined number of clusters based on similarity. However, like every algorithm, K-Means makes certain assumptions about the data and the structure of the problem. Understanding these assumptions is crucial to applying K-Means effectively and knowing when it might fall short.
1. The Fixed Number of Clusters Assumption
One of the most basic assumptions in K-Means clustering is that the number of clusters (denoted as K) is fixed and finite. This means we must decide in advance how many groups we want the algorithm to find. Often, this is not a problem — if we know the number of categories in our data, setting K can be easy.
For example, if we are clustering animals into categories like mammals, reptiles, birds, and fish, we might choose K=4. But what if we don’t know how many clusters there should be? What if the number of meaningful groups grows as we get more data?
2. When Fixed K Doesn’t Work: The Case of Streaming Data
In many modern applications, data is not static. New data points are being added all the time. This is called streaming data. Let’s consider a few examples to see why the fixed K assumption might be unrealistic in these situations.
Wikipedia Example: The “Wikipedia Phenomenon”
Wikipedia adds around 800 new articles per day. Suppose we want to cluster Wikipedia articles by topic. If we only cluster the first 100 articles, we might find a few major topics — for example, sports, politics, and science.
But if we then add thousands or millions more articles, we will surely find entirely new topics — maybe emerging technologies, niche hobbies, or specific historical events — that weren’t in the first sample. This means the number of topics (or clusters) grows as the dataset grows.
Fitness App Example
Imagine we create a fitness app where users can log their workout routines. Initially, users might report common exercises like running, squats, or yoga. But as the app grows and more people use it, we might see more variety — dance workouts, martial arts, circus training, etc.
No matter how many users we ask, we will probably continue discovering new and unique types of exercises. So again, a fixed number of clusters would not be sufficient.
Biology and Genetics Example
Even after centuries of exploration, scientists are still discovering new species regularly. This means that biological classification is still expanding. Similarly, in genetics, researchers might continue to uncover new ancestral populations or health patterns as more DNA samples are analyzed.
These discoveries are not just statistical noise — they are meaningful, and we need clustering methods that can adapt as new patterns emerge.
Social Networks
In a social network, new people join every day, and new communities form. Interests evolve, trends change, and people connect in new ways. Fixing the number of clusters would ignore the ever-growing diversity of user behavior.
3. Growing Complexity with Growing Data
What do these examples have in common? In each case, the complexity of the data — the number of meaningful groups — increases with the size of the dataset. Therefore, we need models where K can grow along with the data.
This challenges the traditional K-Means assumption. Instead of having a static model that fits a snapshot of data, we want a flexible model that evolves over time. But how can we achieve that?
4. Beyond K-Means: Non-Parametric Bayesian Methods
One solution to this problem lies in a class of models known as Non-Parametric Bayesian Methods. Despite the name, “non-parametric” doesn’t mean there are no parameters — it means that the number of parameters (including the number of clusters) is allowed to grow with the data.
These methods are more complex than K-Means, but they offer a way to adapt the model’s complexity dynamically. For example, the Dirichlet Process is a popular non-parametric method used for clustering with an unbounded number of clusters.
Exciting research like MAD-BAYES has even shown how to make these non-parametric Bayesian methods work more like K-Means — fast, simple, and scalable — while still allowing the number of clusters to grow.
5. Key Takeaway
The assumption of a fixed, finite number of clusters is deeply embedded in K-Means clustering, but it’s not always appropriate — especially in streaming data, dynamic systems, or fields of ongoing discovery. In such cases, it’s better to look for clustering models that can grow with your data.
In future parts of this series, we’ll explore more assumptions behind K-Means and how to handle situations when those assumptions are violated.
Leave a Reply