Skip to main content

A Method for Generating Consensus Partitions and its Application to Community Classification

  • Chapter
Computer assisted vegetation analysis

Part of the book series: Handbook of vegetation science ((HAVS,volume 11))

Abstract

An efficient heuristic method called MINGFC (for MINimization of Global Fusion Criterion) is proposed to select approximately optimal consensus partitions from the consensus interval defined by Neumann and Norton. The method utilizes a dissimilarity measure, the number of partitions in which two objects belong to different classes. A new consensus index is defined as the ratio of the average of all within-class dissimilarities to the average of all between-class dissimilarities. The lower this ratio, the more appropriate a given partition is as a consensus of the alternative classifications. This consensus index serves as the fusion criterion in the agglomerative clustering algorithm of MINGFC which generates a series of consensus partitions. The result is represented by a set of at least two trees, in graph theoretical terms: a consensus forest. To obtain a unique solution for any consensus problem, two procedures are suggested to resolve ties encountered during the clustering process. If a particular level of the consensus forest is of primary concern, the partition into the given number of classes may be further improved by an iterative relocation procedure. Artificial partitions and actual vegetation data provide the basis for illustrating MINGFC and iterative relocation, for evaluating the tie-breaking procedures, and for comparing MINGFC with two other hierarchical methods of consensus generation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adams, E.N. 1972. Consensus Techniques and the Comparison of Taxonomic Trees.Systematic Zoology 21: 390–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barthélemy, J.P. and B. Monjardet. 1981. The Median Procedure in Cluster Analysis and Social Choice Theory. Mathematical Social Sciences 1: 235–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cormack, R.M. 1971. A Review of Classification. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, ser. A. 134: 321–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, W.H.E. and H. Edelsbrunner. 1984. Efficient Algorithms for Agglomerative Hierarchical Clustering. Journal of Classification 1: 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diday, E. and J.C. Simon. 1976. Clustering Analysis. In: Fu K.S. (ed.), Digital Pattern Recognition, New York: Springer, pp. 47–94.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hartigan, J.A. 1975. Clustering Algorithms. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jardine, J. and R. Sibson. 1971. Mathematical Taxonomy, London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lance, G.N. and W.T. Williams. 1966. A Generalized Sorting Strategy for Computer Classifications. Nature 212, 218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefkovitch, L.P. 1985. Euclidean Consensus Dendrograms and Other Classification Structures. Mathematical Biosciences 74: 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mirkin, B.G. 1975. On the Problem of Reconciling Partitions. In: H.M. Blalock, A. Aganbegian, F.M. Borodkin, R. Boudon, and V. Capecchi (eds.), Quantitative Sociology, International Perspectives on Mathematical and Statistical Modeling, New York: Academic Press, pp. 441–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, D.A. and V.T. Norton. 1986. Clustering and Isolation in the Consensus Problem for Partitions. Journal of Classification 3: 281–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podani, J. 1985. Syntaxonomic Congruence in a Small-Scale Vegetation Survey. Abstracta Botanica 9: 99–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podani, J. 1988. SYN-TAX III. Computer Programs for data Analysis in Ecology and Systematics. Coenoses 3: 111–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Régnier, S. 1965. Sur quelques aspects mathématiques des problèmes de classification automatique. ICC Bulletin 4: 175–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohlf, F.J. 1982. Consensus Indices for Comparing Classifications. Mathematical Biosciences 59: 131–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

E. Feoli L. Orlóci

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Podani, J. (1991). A Method for Generating Consensus Partitions and its Application to Community Classification. In: Feoli, E., Orlóci, L. (eds) Computer assisted vegetation analysis. Handbook of vegetation science, vol 11. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3418-7_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3418-7_16

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-5512-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-011-3418-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics