Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 8 minor 4 cited by

Bridging the Gap: A Decade Review of Time-Series Clustering Methods

T0 review · 3 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that one unified taxonomy with four first-level and ten second-level categories can organize more than 100 time-series clustering algorithms, spanning classical distances and deep representation learning.

desk verdict Useful survey of time-series clustering whose central taxonomy is internally inconsistent: Table 8 adds categories the text never defines. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.20582 v1 pith:SSBT6SCV submitted 2024-12-29 cs.LG cs.AIcs.DB

John Paparrizos , Fan Yang , Haojun Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.LGcs.AIcs.DB
keywords time-seriesclusteringtaxonomysurveydeeprepresentationlearningdistance-basedsubsequencecontrastiveevaluation
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 survey tries to establish that the field of time-series clustering is best understood as a single design space rather than as two separate eras. Its central claim is that a unified taxonomy with four first-level families—distance-based, distribution-based, subsequence-based, and representation-learning-based—and ten second-level subfamilies can organize more than 100 algorithms from classical k-Means and DTW to contrastive and generative deep models. The authors say earlier reviews treated either conventional methods or deep learning, and that this is the first attempt to bridge both sides. A reader who accepts the map gains a shared vocabulary for comparing algorithms and a way to see where the next algorithm design might fit.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the taxonomy itself. Each first-level family is defined by what carries the clustering signal: raw pairwise distance for distance-based methods, modeled or encoded distribution for distribution-based methods, extracted subsequences or shapelets for subsequence-based methods, and a learned latent representation for representation-learning-based methods. Under these sit ten subfamilies: partitional and hierarchical; model-, density-, feature-, and encoding-based; sliding- and shapelet-based; and comparative- and generative-based. The taxonomy is supported by a three-stage pipeline—representation, dissimilarity measure, and clustering procedure—which the survey uses as the shared vocabulary for comparing methods across families.

What would settle it

Take a published algorithm from the surveyed decade and apply the paper's own definitions: if it falls into two first-level categories at once, or into none, then the taxonomy is not the unified map it claims to be. The paper's own treatment of DEC—listed as comparative-based in Table 8 yet defined by a KL-divergence clustering loss in Section 7.1.3—is a concrete candidate for such a test.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the right way to see time-series clustering is as one continuous design space, not as separate classical and deep learning camps. A single taxonomy with four first-level families—distance-based, distribution-based, subsequence-based, and representation-learning-based—and ten second-level subfamilies can organize more than 100 algorithms from roughly the past decade. The survey asserts that earlier reviews covered only one side of this divide, so this is the first unified map that lets a reader compare k-Means with DTW, shapelet methods, and contrastive deep models on equal footing.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that every algorithm from the surveyed decade fits one, and only one, of the four first-level categories, because the survey's completeness and organizational power rest on that exhaustiveness and mutual exclusivity.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A methods paper can be classified by asking which stage of the pipeline it changes, giving a common frame for comparing an early ARIMA mixture with a modern transformer-based encoder.
  • The taxonomy makes the deep learning era legible as an extension of classical clustering: most deep methods replace the representation stage and then hand the result to k-Means or a similar partitional step.
  • The survey's scope decision—focusing on whole time-series clustering and excluding subsequence and time-point clustering—carries a practical warning: many subsequence-clustering algorithms may inherit the meaningless-cluster problem documented in the literature.
  • Because the same evaluation indices are used across all four families, the taxonomy supplies a consistent basis for comparing accuracy and runtime across classical and deep methods.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural next step the paper does not take is to map each surveyed algorithm onto a grid of representation stage, distance stage, and clustering stage; such a grid would show which combinations are overcrowded and which are empty.
  • The boundary between feature-based methods, which use manually selected descriptive features, and encoding-based methods, which use formula-defined transforms, is drawn by how the representation is produced; a future taxonomy might make that axis explicit instead of implicit.
  • The paper's own placement of DEC—comparative-based in the summary table but defined by a KL-divergence clustering loss in the text—suggests that hybrid methods will keep testing the mutual exclusivity of the categories, so a later edition may need a hybrid or clustering-loss branch.
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

3 major / 8 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a survey of time-series clustering methods spanning classical (distance-, distribution-, and subsequence-based) and modern deep representation-learning approaches. It proposes a taxonomy with four first-level categories and ten second-level categories, reviews representative algorithms in each category, provides summary tables with method-level details, and discusses external and internal clustering evaluation indices. The stated contribution is a comprehensive, unified reference that bridges traditional and deep-learning-based methods, and the authors claim it is the first such unified taxonomy.

Significance. If the taxonomy were internally consistent, the survey would be a useful map of the field: it collects more than one hundred algorithms, organizes them around pipeline components (representation, dissimilarity measure, clustering procedure), and gives structured coverage of recent contrastive, generative, and foundation-model work. Its breadth and its attention to recent deep-learning methods are genuine strengths. The paper does not ship code or machine-checked proofs; its value is scholarly synthesis. However, as written, the central deliverable—the unified taxonomy—is not reliable because the paper's own summary tables introduce second-level categories that the taxonomy section neither defines nor counts.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3 and Table 8] The taxonomy's central claim is internally inconsistent. Section 3 defines exactly ten second-level categories (partitional, hierarchical, model-based, density-based, feature-based, encoding-based, sliding-based, shapelet-based, comparative-based, generative-based), and Figure 6 sketches these. Table 8, however, labels four rows (DTCC, TimeCLR, conDetSEC, MCAE) as 'Hybrid-based' and five rows (GPT4TS, Chronos, MOMENT, TimesFM, UniTS) as 'Foundation-Model', categories that appear nowhere in Section 3. The table caption gives a one-line definition of 'Hybrid-based' but no definition of 'Foundation-Model', and Section 7 discusses no hybrid-based or foundation-model category. Section 9 then repeats the 4+10 count. Consequently a reader cannot reliably place nine recent algorithms, which is exactly the situation the proposed unified taxonomy is meant to prevent; either the taxonomy has twelve second-level categories and the count is wrong, or these methods are outside the taxonomy.
  2. [Table 8; §7.1.3; §7.2] The assignment of DEC to 'Comparative-based' contradicts the paper's own definitions. Section 7.1.3 presents the DEC objective as KL(P∥Q), a clustering-oriented loss in KL-divergence form, while Section 7.2 defines comparative-based methods as those that learn an encoder 'in a comparative way, e.g., contrastive learning (CNRV) or generative adversarial networks (ADV)'. DEC is neither contrastive nor adversarial. This is not a cosmetic label: it means the second-level membership rule given in Section 3.4 cannot be applied mechanically, since DEC passes the 'learned encoder' test but fails the 'comparative' criterion, and the table has no allowed category for a clustering-loss-based deep method. The paper should either add a clustering-loss second-level category, reclassify DEC (and audit the other CLS rows, such as RDDC), or explicitly define comparative-based more broadly.
  3. [§2.2 and Abstract] The abstract promises a comprehensive review of time-series clustering, but Section 2.2 deliberately excludes time-point clustering and classical subsequence clustering, restricting attention to whole time-series clustering. This scope decision is defensible and follows earlier literature [3, 115], but it should be disclosed in the abstract and introduction, since the claimed 'comprehensive, unified taxonomy' otherwise overstates coverage. The 'Subsequence-based' category of Section 6 is a different notion (subsequence-guided whole-series clustering), and that distinction is explained in the body, but the abstract should not imply coverage of the excluded families.
minor comments (8)
  1. [§3.4] The sentence 'we divide three second-level categories: Comparative-based, and Generative-based models' should say 'two', as it lists only two categories and the total in the paper is ten.
  2. [§4.1] The text twice refers to 'PAW Swap'; this should be 'PAM Swap' (Partitioning Around Medoids).
  3. [§6.1] 'In stead of the previous subsequence clustering strategy' should read 'Instead of'.
  4. [§7.2.1] The heading 'Temporal Contast' should be 'Temporal Contrast', and 'postive pairs' should be 'positive pairs'.
  5. [§7.1.1] In the equation discussion, 'the neighborhood of the noce v' should read 'node v'.
  6. [References [158] and [159]] References [158] and [159] are duplicate entries for the same paper, 'Learning Representations for Incomplete Time Series Clustering'; the text in §7.2.2 cites [159] while Table 8 uses [158].
  7. [§7.3.1] The text 'IDEC [83, 162] proposes...' cites [162] as an IDEC source, but [162] is DTC (Deep Temporal Clustering), a separate method that is also listed on its own in Table 8.
  8. [Header and template] The ACM reference block in the header lists a 2018 copyright and a 'Received 20 February 2007' line, while the arXiv submission is dated December 2024 and discusses 2024 publications; this template should be updated before submission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the survey's taxonomy and historical organization are not derived from fitted parameters or self-citation chains.

full rationale

This is a survey paper, not a derivation. Its central deliverable is a literature organization: a 4-category, 10-second-level taxonomy of time-series clustering algorithms, supported by per-method summary tables and narrative reviews. There is no fitted parameter that is later renamed as a prediction, no equation whose output is equal to its input by construction, and no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors' prior work to force a choice. The authors' own algorithms (k-Shape, k-MS, Odyssey, distance-measure studies) appear as surveyed methods and as background citations, which is expected for authors who contributed core methods in the area, but the taxonomy itself does not reduce to those citations. The claimed contribution, 'a comprehensive, unified taxonomy,' is an organizational claim that can be checked against the tables and sections; it is not an empirical prediction derived from the authors' own equations. The paper does contain an internal inconsistency—Table 8 labels several methods 'Hybrid-based' and 'Foundation-Model' even though Section 3 enumerates only 10 second-level categories that do not include those labels—but that is a classification-consistency issue, not circular reasoning. It does not make the survey's derivation equivalent to its inputs, because there is no derivation. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

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

The paper's claims depend mainly on scope and classification assumptions rather than on fitted parameters or invented entities. The most important assumption is that the proposed categories are complete and cleanly separated. The paper itself provides evidence of boundary ambiguity, so this assumption is not fully secured.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Subsequence clustering and time-point clustering are either meaningless or redundant, so they are excluded from scope.
    Section 2.2 cites [115] and [3] to justify focusing on whole time-series clustering; this scope decision shapes the taxonomy and the comprehensiveness claim.
  • ad hoc to paper The four first-level categories (distance, distribution, subsequence, representation-learning) are jointly exhaustive and mutually exclusive.
    Section 3 states that all methods are divided into these categories, but the boundaries are not derived from a formal criterion. Table 8's placement of DEC as comparative highlights the boundary ambiguity.
  • ad hoc to paper Encoding-based methods use explicit formulas while representation-learning methods use learned encoders.
    Sections 3.2 and 3.4 draw this distinction to separate feature/encoding methods from deep learning methods, but the line is definitional rather than derived.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bridging the Gap: A Decade Review of Time-Series Clustering Methods." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SSBT6SCV

@misc{pith2026241220582,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bridging the Gap: A Decade Review of Time-Series Clustering Methods},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SSBT6SCV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.20582}
}
read the original abstract

Time series, as one of the most fundamental representations of sequential data, has been extensively studied across diverse disciplines, including computer science, biology, geology, astronomy, and environmental sciences. The advent of advanced sensing, storage, and networking technologies has resulted in high-dimensional time-series data, however, posing significant challenges for analyzing latent structures over extended temporal scales. Time-series clustering, an established unsupervised learning strategy that groups similar time series together, helps unveil hidden patterns in these complex datasets. In this survey, we trace the evolution of time-series clustering methods from classical approaches to recent advances in neural networks. While previous surveys have focused on specific methodological categories, we bridge the gap between traditional clustering methods and emerging deep learning-based algorithms, presenting a comprehensive, unified taxonomy for this research area. This survey highlights key developments and provides insights to guide future research in time-series clustering.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.20582 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Examples of time-series clustering across different domains and applications. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Examples of univariate time series (left) and multivariate time series (right). Compared with univariate time-series clustering, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Categories of time-series clustering labeling. Left: whole time-series clustering; right: subsequence time-series clustering. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (17 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Two main types of whole time-series clustering methods. Left: clustering methods based on entire time series; right: clustering [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The overview of the time-series clustering pipeline. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The taxonomy of time-series clustering algorithms. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: An overview of partitional time-series clustering. Two tables [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: An example of Hidden Markov Model (HMM). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: An example of Symbolic Aggregate approXimation (SAX). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The overview of a shapelet transform pipeline [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The T-SNE visualization of the encoded representation (learned by representation-learning-based strategy) on the UCR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The overview of the structure of perceptron and the multilayer perceptron (MLP). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The overview of the convolution mechanism. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The overview of the LSTM architecture, one of the classic RNN-based networks. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: The overview of the attention mechanism in Transformer [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: The structure of a simple graph neural network. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Overview of the contrastive learning strategy. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Overview of the generative adversarial networks (GAN). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Overview of reconstruction-based learning. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Overview of forecasting-based learning. As various deep learning techniques continue to emerge, the influence of different model designs has be￾come one of the focus in recent studies, e.g., GNN and attention-based neural networks. SDCN [29] proposes a dual self-super…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Terminal Dimension Reduction for Time Series with Applications

    cs.DS 2026-07 accept novelty 7.5 of 10

    Lines-preserving terminal embeddings of target dimension O(ℓ ε^{-4} log(nm)) give the first dimension-free Fréchet coresets of size Õ(k ε^{-2-z} ℓ² log² m).

  2. CSTS: A Benchmark for the Discovery of Correlation Structures in Time Series Clustering

    cs.LG 2025-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    CSTS provides a synthetic benchmark with 23 ground-truth correlation patterns across data variants, plus reference values, to evaluate correlation-based time series clustering algorithms and validation measures.

  3. MINT: Tensor Decomposition on Stacked Recurrence Matrices for Time Series Data Mining

    cs.LG 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MINT stacks per-series recurrence matrices into a tensor and applies CPD to recover interpretable cross-sensor co-clustering patterns in time series.

  4. FMMVCC: Fuzzy Mamba-based Multi-View Contrastive Clustering for Univariate Time Series

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    FMMVCC combines Mamba-based encoders with multi-view contrastive learning and fuzzy clustering to achieve state-of-the-art univariate time series clustering with linear computational complexity.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

268 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Tatiana Afanasieva, N Yarushkina, and Ivan Sibirev. 2017. Time series clustering using numerical and fuzzy representations. In2017 Joint 17th World Congress of International Fuzzy Systems Association and 9th International Conference on Soft Computing and Intelligent Systems (IFSA-SCIS) . IEEE, 1–7

    2017

  2. [2]

    Saeed Aghabozorgi, Mahmoud Reza Saybani, and Teh Ying Wah. 2012. Incremental clustering of time-series by fuzzy clustering. Journal of Information Science and Engineering 28, 4 (2012), 671–688

    2012

  3. [3]

    Saeed Aghabozorgi, Ali Seyed Shirkhorshidi, and Teh Ying Wah. 2015. Time-series clustering–a decade review. Information Systems 53 (2015), 16–38

    2015

  4. [4]

    Saeed Aghabozorgi and Ying Wah Teh. 2014. Stock market co-movement assessment using a three-phase clustering method. Expert Systems with Applications 41, 4 (2014), 1301–1314

    2014

  5. [5]

    Saeed Aghabozorgi, Teh Ying Wah, Tutut Herawan, Hamid A Jalab, Mohammad Amin Shaygan, and Alireza Jalali. 2014. A hybrid algorithm for clustering of time series data based on affinity search technique. The Scientific World Journal 2014 (2014)

    2014

  6. [6]

    Rakesh Agrawal, Christos Faloutsos, and Arun Swami. 1993. Efficient similarity search in sequence databases. In International conference on foundations of data organization and algorithms . Springer, 69–84

    1993

  7. [7]

    Ali Alqahtani, Mohammed Ali, Xianghua Xie, and Mark W Jones. 2021. Deep time-series clustering: A review. Electronics 10, 23 (2021), 3001

    2021

  8. [8]

    Enrique Amigó, Julio Gonzalo, Javier Artiles, and Felisa Verdejo. 2009. A comparison of extrinsic clustering evaluation metrics based on formal constraints. Information retrieval 12 (2009), 461–486. Manuscript submitted to ACM Bridging the Gap: A Decade Review of Time-Series Clustering Methods 43

    2009

Show all 268 references
  1. [9]

    Gaurangi Anand and Richi Nayak. 2020. Unsupervised visual time-series representation learning and clustering. In Neural Information Processing: 27th International Conference, ICONIP 2020, Bangkok, Thailand, November 18–22, 2020, Proceedings, Part V 27 . Springer, 832–840

    2020

  2. [10]

    Henrik André-Jönsson and Dushan Z Badal. 1997. Using signature files for querying time-series data. In Principles of Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery: First European Symposium, PKDD’97 Trondheim, Norway, June 24–27, 1997 Proceedings 1 . Springer, 211–220

    1997

  3. [11]

    Mihael Ankerst, Markus M Breunig, Hans-Peter Kriegel, and Jörg Sander. 1999. OPTICS: Ordering points to identify the clustering structure. ACM Sigmod record 28, 2 (1999), 49–60

    1999

  4. [12]

    Maddix, Michael W

    Abdul Fatir Ansari, Lorenzo Stella, Caner Turkmen, Xiyuan Zhang, Pedro Mercado, Huibin Shen, Oleksandr Shchur, Syama Syndar Rangapuram, Sebastian Pineda Arango, Shubham Kapoor, Jasper Zschiegner, Danielle C. Maddix, Michael W. Mahoney, Kari Torkkola, Andrew Gordon Wilson, Mich...

    2024

  5. [13]

    David Arthur and Sergei Vassilvitskii. 2007. K-means++ the advantages of careful seeding. In Proceedings of the eighteenth annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms . 1027–1035

    2007

  6. [14]

    Anthony Bagnall, Hoang Anh Dau, Jason Lines, Michael Flynn, James Large, Aaron Bostrom, Paul Southam, and Eamonn Keogh. 2018. The UEA multivariate time series classification archive, 2018. arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.00075 (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Anthony Bagnall and Gareth Janacek. 2005. Clustering time series with clipped data. Machine learning 58, 2 (2005), 151–178

    2005

  8. [16]

    Dzmitry Bahdanau, Kyunghyun Cho, and Yoshua Bengio. 2014. Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate.arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.0473 (2014)

    2014 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Dana H Ballard. 1987. Modular learning in neural networks. In Proceedings of the sixth National Conference on artificial intelligence-volume 1 . 279–284

    1987

  10. [18]

    Mohini Bariya, Alexandra von Meier, John Paparrizos, and Michael J Franklin. 2021. k-shapestream: Probabilistic streaming clustering for electric grid events. In 2021 IEEE Madrid PowerTech. IEEE, 1–6

    2021

  11. [19]

    Ildar Batyrshin. 2013. Constructing time series shape association measures: Minkowski distance and data standardization. In 2013 BRICS congress on computational intelligence and 11th Brazilian congress on computational intelligence . IEEE, 204–212

    2013

  12. [20]

    Leonard E Baum et al. 1972. An inequality and associated maximization technique in statistical estimation for probabilistic functions of Markov processes. Inequalities 3, 1 (1972), 1–8

    1972

  13. [21]

    Mustafa Gokce Baydogan, George Runger, and Eugene Tuv. 2013. A bag-of-features framework to classify time series. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 35, 11 (2013), 2796–2802

    2013

  14. [22]

    Suzanna Becker. 1991. Unsupervised learning procedures for neural networks. International Journal of Neural Systems 2, 01n02 (1991), 17–33

    1991

  15. [23]

    Nurjahan Begum, Liudmila Ulanova, Jun Wang, and Eamonn Keogh. 2015. Accelerating dynamic time warping clustering with a novel admissible pruning strategy. In Proceedings of the 21th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining . 49–58

    2015

  16. [24]

    Jan Beran and Guerino Mazzola. 1999. Visualizing the relationship between two time series by hierarchical smoothing models. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 8, 2 (1999), 213–238

    1999

  17. [25]

    Donald J Berndt and James Clifford. 1994. Using dynamic time warping to find patterns in time series. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining . 359–370

    1994

  18. [26]

    James C Bezdek. 2013. Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective function algorithms . Springer Science & Business Media

    2013

  19. [27]

    Christophe Biernacki, Gilles Celeux, and Gérard Govaert. 2000. Assessing a mixture model for clustering with the integrated completed likelihood. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 22, 7 (2000), 719–725

    2000

  20. [28]

    Christopher M Bishop and Nasser M Nasrabadi. 2006. Pattern recognition and machine learning . Vol. 4. Springer

    2006

  21. [29]

    Deyu Bo, Xiao Wang, Chuan Shi, Meiqi Zhu, Emiao Lu, and Peng Cui. 2020. Structural deep clustering network. InProceedings of the web conference

    2020

  22. [30]

    Fabrizio Bonacina, Eric Stefan Miele, and Alessandro Corsini. 2020. Time series clustering: a complex network-based approach for feature selection in multi-sensor data. Modelling 1, 1 (2020), 1–21

    2020

  23. [31]

    Paul Boniol, John Paparrizos, Yuhao Kang, Themis Palpanas, Ruey S Tsay, Aaron J Elmore, and Michael J Franklin. 2022. Theseus: navigating the labyrinth of time-series anomaly detection. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 15, 12 (2022), 3702–3705

    2022

  24. [32]

    Paul Boniol, John Paparrizos, and Themis Palpanas. 2023. New Trends in Time Series Anomaly Detection.. In EDBT. 847–850

    2023

  25. [33]

    Paul Boniol, John Paparrizos, and Themis Palpanas. 2024. An Interactive Dive into Time-Series Anomaly Detection. In 2024 IEEE 40th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE)

    2024

  26. [34]

    Paul Boniol, John Paparrizos, Themis Palpanas, and Michael J Franklin. 2021. Sand in action: subsequence anomaly detection for streams.Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 14, 12 (2021), 2867–2870

    2021

  27. [35]

    Paul Boniol, John Paparrizos, Themis Palpanas, and Michael J Franklin. 2021. SAND: streaming subsequence anomaly detection. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 14, 10 (2021), 1717–1729

    2021

  28. [36]

    Paul Boniol, Emmanouil Sylligardos, John Paparrizos, Panos Trahanias, and Themis Palpanas. 2024. ADecimo: Model Selection for Time Series Anomaly Detection. In 2024 IEEE 40th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE)

    2024

  29. [37]

    Kin-Pong Chan and Ada Wai-Chee Fu. 1999. Efficient time series matching by wavelets. In Proceedings 15th International Conference on Data Engineering (Cat. No. 99CB36337) . IEEE, 126–133. Manuscript submitted to ACM 44 Paparrizos et al

    1999

  30. [38]

    Yuan-Chi Chang, Dharmashankar Subramanian, Raju Pavuluri, and Timothy Dinger. 2022. Time series representation learning with contrastive triplet selection. In 5th Joint International Conference on Data Science & Management of Data (9th ACM IKDD CODS and 27th COMAD) . 46–53

    2022

  31. [39]

    Ting Chen, Simon Kornblith, Mohammad Norouzi, and Geoffrey Hinton. 2020. A simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations. In International conference on machine learning . PMLR, 1597–1607

    2020

  32. [40]

    Yanping Chen, Eamonn Keogh, Bing Hu, Nurjahan Begum, Anthony Bagnall, Abdullah Mueen, and Gustavo Batista. 2015. The UCR Time Series Classification Archive. www.cs.ucr.edu/~eamonn/time_series_data/

    2015

  33. [41]

    Yixin Chen and Li Tu. 2007. Density-based clustering for real-time stream data. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining . 133–142

    2007

  34. [42]

    Kyunghyun Cho, Bart Van Merriënboer, Caglar Gulcehre, Dzmitry Bahdanau, Fethi Bougares, Holger Schwenk, and Yoshua Bengio. 2014. Learning phrase representations using RNN encoder-decoder for statistical machine translation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.1078 (2014)

    2014 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Kushan Ajay Choksi, Sonal Jain, and Naran M Pindoriya. 2020. Feature based clustering technique for investigation of domestic load profiles and probabilistic variation assessment: Smart meter dataset. Sustainable Energy, Grids and Networks 22 (2020), 100346

    2020

  36. [44]

    Maximilian Christ, Nils Braun, Julius Neuffer, and Andreas W Kempa-Liehr. 2018. Time series feature extraction on basis of scalable hypothesis tests (tsfresh–a python package). Neurocomputing 307 (2018), 72–77

    2018

  37. [45]

    Maximilian Christ, Andreas W Kempa-Liehr, and Michael Feindt. 2016. Distributed and parallel time series feature extraction for industrial big data applications. arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.07717 (2016)

    2016 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Selina Chu, Eamonn Keogh, David Hart, and Michael Pazzani. 2002. Iterative deepening dynamic time warping for time series. In Proceedings of the 2002 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining . SIAM, 195–212

    2002

  39. [47]

    Robert Darkins, Emma J Cooke, Zoubin Ghahramani, Paul DW Kirk, David L Wild, and Richard S Savage. 2013. Accelerating Bayesian hierarchical clustering of time series data with a randomised algorithm. PloS one 8, 4 (2013), e59795

    2013

  40. [48]

    Abhimanyu Das, Weihao Kong, Rajat Sen, and Yichen Zhou. 2024. A decoder-only foundation model for time-series forecasting. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning . https://openreview.net/forum?id=jn2iTJas6h

    2024

  41. [49]

    David L Davies and Donald W Bouldin. 1979. A cluster separation measure. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 2 (1979), 224–227

    1979

  42. [50]

    Rui Ding, Qiang Wang, Yingnong Dang, Qiang Fu, Haidong Zhang, and Dongmei Zhang. 2015. Yading: Fast clustering of large-scale time series data. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 8, 5 (2015), 473–484

    2015

  43. [51]

    Joseph C Dunn. 1973. A fuzzy relative of the ISODATA process and its use in detecting compact well-separated clusters. (1973)

    1973

  44. [52]

    Joseph C Dunn. 1974. Well-separated clusters and optimal fuzzy partitions. Journal of cybernetics 4, 1 (1974), 95–104

    1974

  45. [53]

    Adam Dziedzic, John Paparrizos, Sanjay Krishnan, Aaron Elmore, and Michael Franklin. 2019. Band-limited training and inference for convolutional neural networks. In International Conference on Machine Learning . PMLR, 1745–1754

    2019

  46. [54]

    Jens E d’Hondt, Odysseas Papapetrou, and John Paparrizos. 2024. Beyond the Dimensions: A Structured Evaluation of Multivariate Time Series Distance Measures. In 2024 IEEE 40th International Conference on Data Engineering Workshops (ICDEW) . IEEE, 107–112

    2024

  47. [55]

    Hussein El Amouri, Thomas Lampert, Pierre Gançarski, and Clément Mallet. 2023. Constrained DTW preserving shapelets for explainable time-Series clustering. Pattern Recognition 143 (2023), 109804

    2023

  48. [56]

    Emadeldeen Eldele, Mohamed Ragab, Zhenghua Chen, Min Wu, Chee Keong Kwoh, Xiaoli Li, and Cuntai Guan. 2021. Time-Series Representation Learning via Temporal and Contextual Contrasting. In Proceedings of the Thirtieth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, I...

    2021

  49. [57]

    Jonatan Enes, Roberto R Expósito, José Fuentes, Javier López Cacheiro, and Juan Touriño. 2023. A pipeline architecture for feature-based unsupervised clustering using multivariate time series from HPC jobs. Information Fusion 93 (2023), 1–20

    2023

  50. [58]

    Martin Ester, Hans-Peter Kriegel, Jörg Sander, Xiaowei Xu, et al. 1996. A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise.. In kdd, Vol. 96. 226–231

    1996

  51. [59]

    Carolina Euán, Hernando Ombao, and Joaquín Ortega. 2018. The hierarchical spectral merger algorithm: a new time series clustering procedure. Journal of Classification 35 (2018), 71–99

    2018

  52. [60]

    Christos Faloutsos, Mudumbai Ranganathan, and Yannis Manolopoulos. 1994. Fast subsequence matching in time-series databases. ACM Sigmod Record 23, 2 (1994), 419–429

    1994

  53. [61]

    Vincent Fortuin, Matthias Hüser, Francesco Locatello, Heiko Strathmann, and Gunnar Rätsch. 2019. Deep Self-Organization: Interpretable Discrete Representation Learning on Time Series. In International Conference on Learning Representations . https://openreview.net/forum?id=rygjcsR9Y7

    2019

  54. [62]

    Vanel Steve Siyou Fotso, Engelbert Mephu Nguifo, and Philippe Vaslin. 2020. Frobenius correlation based u-shapelets discovery for time series clustering. Pattern Recognition 103 (2020), 107301

    2020

  55. [63]

    Jean-Yves Franceschi, Aymeric Dieuleveut, and Martin Jaggi. 2019. Unsupervised scalable representation learning for multivariate time series. Advances in neural information processing systems 32 (2019)

    2019

  56. [64]

    Tak-chung Fu, Fu-lai Chung, Vincent Ng, and Robert Luk. 2001. Pattern discovery from stock time series using self-organizing maps. In Workshop Notes of KDD2001 Workshop on Temporal Data Mining , Vol. 1. Citeseer

    2001

  57. [65]

    Ben D Fulcher. 2018. Feature-based time-series analysis. In Feature engineering for machine learning and data analytics . CRC press, 87–116

    2018

  58. [66]

    Ben D Fulcher and Nick S Jones. 2014. Highly comparative feature-based time-series classification. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 26, 12 (2014), 3026–3037. Manuscript submitted to ACM Bridging the Gap: A Decade Review of Time-Series Clustering Methods 45

    2014

  59. [67]

    Ben D Fulcher and Nick S Jones. 2017. hctsa: A computational framework for automated time-series phenotyping using massive feature extraction. Cell systems 5, 5 (2017), 527–531

    2017

  60. [68]

    Boyan Gao, Yongxin Yang, Henry Gouk, and Timothy M Hospedales. 2020. Deep clusteringwith concrete k-means. In ICASSP 2020-2020 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing (ICASSP) . IEEE, 4252–4256

    2020

  61. [69]

    Shanghua Gao, Teddy Koker, Owen Queen, Thomas Hartvigsen, Theodoros Tsiligkaridis, and Marinka Zitnik. 2024. UniTS: Building a Unified Time Series Model. arXiv (2024). https://arxiv.org/pdf/2403.00131.pdf

    2024 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Kamran Ghasedi, Xiaoqian Wang, Cheng Deng, and Heng Huang. 2019. Balanced self-paced learning for generative adversarial clustering network. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition . 4391–4400

    2019

  63. [71]

    Kamran Ghasedi Dizaji, Amirhossein Herandi, Cheng Deng, Weidong Cai, and Heng Huang. 2017. Deep clustering via joint convolutional autoencoder embedding and relative entropy minimization. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision . 5736–5745

    2017

  64. [72]

    Shima Ghassempour, Federico Girosi, and Anthony Maeder. 2014. Clustering multivariate time series using hidden Markov models. International journal of environmental research and public health 11, 3 (2014), 2741–2763

    2014

  65. [73]

    Rafael Giusti and Gustavo EAPA Batista. 2013. An empirical comparison of dissimilarity measures for time series classification. In 2013 Brazilian Conference on Intelligent Systems . IEEE, 82–88

    2013

  66. [74]

    Rahul Goel, Sandeep Soni, Naman Goyal, John Paparrizos, Hanna Wallach, Fernando Diaz, and Jacob Eisenstein. 2016. The social dynamics of language change in online networks. In Social Informatics: 8th International Conference, SocInfo 2016, Bellevue, W A, USA, November 11-14, 2...

    2016

  67. [75]

    Xavier Golay, Spyros Kollias, Gautier Stoll, Dieter Meier, Anton Valavanis, and Peter Boesiger. 1998. A new correlation-based fuzzy logic clustering algorithm for FMRI. Magnetic resonance in medicine 40, 2 (1998), 249–260

    1998

  68. [76]

    Gene H Golub and Charles F Van Loan. 2013. Matrix computations. JHU press

    2013

  69. [77]

    Ian Goodfellow, Jean Pouget-Abadie, Mehdi Mirza, Bing Xu, David Warde-Farley, Sherjil Ozair, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. 2014. Generative Adversarial Nets. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , Z. Ghahramani, M. Welling, C. Cortes, N. Lawrence, and K.Q...

    2014

  70. [78]

    Mononito Goswami, Konrad Szafer, Arjun Choudhry, Yifu Cai, Shuo Li, and Artur Dubrawski. 2024. MOMENT: A Family of Open Time-series Foundation Models. In International Conference on Machine Learning

    2024

  71. [79]

    He-Shan Guam and Qing-Shan Jiang. 2007. Cluster financial time series for portfolio. In 2007 international conference on wavelet analysis and pattern recognition, Vol. 2. IEEE, 851–856

    2007

  72. [80]

    David Guijo-Rubio, Antonio Manuel Durán-Rosal, Pedro Antonio Gutiérrez, Alicia Troncoso, and César Hervás-Martínez. 2020. Time-series clustering based on the characterization of segment typologies. IEEE transactions on cybernetics 51, 11 (2020), 5409–5422

    2020

  73. [81]

    Francesco Gullo, Giovanni Ponti, Andrea Tagarelli, Giuseppe Tradigo, and Pierangelo Veltri. 2012. A time series approach for clustering mass spectrometry data. Journal of Computational Science 3, 5 (2012), 344–355

    2012

  74. [82]

    Chonghui Guo, Hongfeng Jia, and Na Zhang. 2008. Time series clustering based on ICA for stock data analysis. In 2008 4th international conference on wireless communications, networking and mobile computing . IEEE, 1–4

    2008

  75. [83]

    Xifeng Guo, Long Gao, Xinwang Liu, and Jianping Yin. 2017. Improved Deep Embedded Clustering with Local Structure Preservation.. In IJCAI. 1753–1759

    2017

  76. [84]

    Will Hamilton, Zhitao Ying, and Jure Leskovec. 2017. Inductive representation learning on large graphs. Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017)

    2017

  77. [85]

    Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. 2016. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition . 770–778

    2016

  78. [86]

    Alexander Hinneburg and Hans-Henning Gabriel. 2007. Denclue 2.0: Fast clustering based on kernel density estimation. InInternational symposium on intelligent data analysis . Springer, 70–80

    2007

  79. [87]

    Alexander Hinneburg and Daniel A Keim. 1998. An efficient approach to clustering in large multimedia databases with noise. In Knowledge Discovery and Datamining (KDD’98) . 58–65

    1998

  80. [88]

    Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 1997. Long short-term memory. Neural computation 9, 8 (1997), 1735–1780

    1997

  81. [89]

    Christopher Holder, Matthew Middlehurst, and Anthony Bagnall. 2023. A review and evaluation of elastic distance functions for time series clustering. Knowledge and Information Systems (2023), 1–45

    2023

  82. [90]

    John J Hopfield. 1982. Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences 79, 8 (1982), 2554–2558

    1982

  83. [91]

    Maomao Hu, Dongjiao Ge, Rory Telford, Bruce Stephen, and David CH Wallom. 2021. Classification and characterization of intra-day load curves of PV and non-PV households using interpretable feature extraction and feature-based clustering. Sustainable Cities and Society 75 (2021...

    2021

  84. [92]

    Fanling Huang and Yangdong Deng. 2023. TCGAN: Convolutional Generative Adversarial Network for time series classification and clustering. Neural Networks 165 (2023), 868–883

    2023

  85. [93]

    Hao Huang, Tapan Shah, and Shinjae Yoo. 2022. Deep Time Series Sketching and Its Application on Industrial Time Series Clustering. In 2022 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data) . IEEE, 1997–2006

    2022

  86. [94]

    Lawrence Hubert and Phipps Arabie. 1985. Comparing partitions. Journal of classification 2 (1985), 193–218

    1985

  87. [95]

    Rob J Hyndman and George Athanasopoulos. 2018. Forecasting: principles and practice . OTexts. Manuscript submitted to ACM 46 Paparrizos et al

    2018

  88. [96]

    Dino Ienco and Roberto Interdonato. 2020. Deep multivariate time series embedding clustering via attentive-gated autoencoder. In Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining: 24th Pacific-Asia Conference, PAKDD 2020, Singapore, May 11–14, 2020, Proceedings, Part I 24 . Spri...

    2020

  89. [97]

    Dino Ienco and Roberto Interdonato. 2023. Deep semi-supervised clustering for multi-variate time-series. Neurocomputing 516 (2023), 36–47

    2023

  90. [98]

    Dino Ienco and Ruggero G Pensa. 2019. Deep triplet-driven semi-supervised embedding clustering. In Discovery Science: 22nd International Conference, DS 2019, Split, Croatia, October 28–30, 2019, Proceedings 22 . Springer, 220–234

    2019

  91. [99]

    Félix Iglesias and Wolfgang Kastner. 2013. Analysis of similarity measures in times series clustering for the discovery of building energy patterns. Energies 6, 2 (2013), 579–597

    2013

  92. [100]

    Anil K Jain and Richard C Dubes. 1988. Algorithms for clustering data . Prentice-Hall, Inc

    1988

  93. [101]

    Ali Javed, Byung Suk Lee, and Donna M Rizzo. 2020. A benchmark study on time series clustering. Machine Learning with Applications 1 (2020), 100001

    2020

  94. [102]

    Hoyoung Jeung, Sofiane Sarni, Ioannis Paparrizos, Saket Sathe, Karl Aberer, Nicholas Dawes, Thanasis G Papaioannou, and Michael Lehning

  95. [103]

    Min Ji, Fuding Xie, and Yu Ping. 2013. A dynamic fuzzy cluster algorithm for time series. In Abstract and Applied Analysis, Vol. 2013. Hindawi

    2013

  96. [104]

    Hao Jiang, Chunwei Liu, Qi Jin, John Paparrizos, and Aaron J Elmore. 2020. Pids: attribute decomposition for improved compression and query performance in columnar storage. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 13, 6 (2020), 925–938

    2020

  97. [105]

    Hao Jiang, Chunwei Liu, John Paparrizos, Andrew A Chien, Jihong Ma, and Aaron J Elmore. 2021. Good to the last bit: Data-driven encoding with codecdb. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Management of Data . 843–856

    2021

  98. [106]

    Zhuxi Jiang, Yin Zheng, Huachun Tan, Bangsheng Tang, and Hanning Zhou. 2017. Variational deep embedding: an unsupervised and generative approach to clustering. In Proceedings of the 26th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence . 1965–1972

    2017

  99. [107]

    CI Johnpaul, Munaga VNK Prasad, S Nickolas, and GR Gangadharan. 2020. Trendlets: A novel probabilistic representational structures for clustering the time series data. Expert Systems with Applications 145 (2020), 113119

    2020

  100. [108]

    Eleanna Kafeza, Gerasimos Rompolas, Sokratis Kyriazidis, and Christos Makris. 2022. Time-Series Clustering for Determining Behavioral-Based Brand Loyalty of Users Across Social Media. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems (2022)

    2022

  101. [109]

    Yoshihide Kakizawa, Robert H Shumway, and Masanobu Taniguchi. 1998. Discrimination and clustering for multivariate time series. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 93, 441 (1998), 328–340

    1998

  102. [110]

    Konstantinos Kalpakis, Dhiral Gada, and Vasundhara Puttagunta. 2001. Distance measures for effective clustering of ARIMA time-series. In Proceedings 2001 IEEE international conference on data mining . IEEE, 273–280

    2001

  103. [111]

    Antonina Kashtalian and Tomas Sochor. 2021. K-means Clustering of Honeynet Data with Unsupervised Representation Learning.. In IntelITSIS. 439–449

    2021

  104. [112]

    Leonard Kaufman and Peter J Rousseeuw. 2009. Finding groups in data: an introduction to cluster analysis . John Wiley & Sons

    2009

  105. [113]

    Kyoji Kawagoe and Tomohiro Ueda. 2002. A similarity search method of time series data with combination of Fourier and wavelet transforms. In Proceedings Ninth International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning . IEEE, 86–92

    2002

  106. [114]

    Eamonn Keogh, Kaushik Chakrabarti, Michael Pazzani, and Sharad Mehrotra. 2001. Dimensionality reduction for fast similarity search in large time series databases. Knowledge and information Systems 3 (2001), 263–286

    2001

  107. [115]

    Eamonn Keogh and Jessica Lin. 2005. Clustering of time-series subsequences is meaningless: implications for previous and future research. Knowledge and information systems 8 (2005), 154–177

    2005

  108. [116]

    Eamonn Keogh, Stefano Lonardi, and Chotirat Ann Ratanamahatana. 2004. Towards parameter-free data mining. In Proceedings of the tenth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining . 206–215

    2004

  109. [117]

    Eamonn J Keogh and Michael J Pazzani. 1998. An Enhanced Representation of Time Series Which Allows Fast and Accurate Classification, Clustering and Relevance Feedback.. In Kdd, Vol. 98. 239–243

    1998

  110. [118]

    Eamonn J Keogh and Michael J Pazzani. 2000. A simple dimensionality reduction technique for fast similarity search in large time series databases. In Pacific-Asia conference on knowledge discovery and data mining . Springer, 122–133

    2000

  111. [119]

    Mohammad Mahmudur Rahman Khan, Md Abu Bakr Siddique, Rezoana Bente Arif, and Mahjabin Rahman Oishe. 2018. ADBSCAN: Adaptive density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise for identifying clusters with varying densities. In 2018 4th international conference on elec...

    2018

  112. [120]

    Diederik P Kingma and Max Welling. 2013. Auto-encoding variational bayes. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6114 (2013)

    2013 arXiv

  113. [121]

    Kipf and Max Welling

    Thomas N. Kipf and Max Welling. 2017. Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations. https://openreview.net/forum?id=SJU4ayYgl

    2017

  114. [122]

    Dani Kiyasseh, Tingting Zhu, and David Clifton. 2021. CROCS: clustering and retrieval of cardiac signals based on patient disease class, sex, and age. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34 (2021), 15557–15569

    2021

  115. [123]

    Katarina Košmelj and Vladimir Batagelj. 1990. Cross-sectional approach for clustering time varying data. Journal of Classification 7, 1 (1990), 99–109

    1990

  116. [124]

    Mark A Kramer. 1991. Nonlinear principal component analysis using autoassociative neural networks. AIChE journal 37, 2 (1991), 233–243. Manuscript submitted to ACM Bridging the Gap: A Decade Review of Time-Series Clustering Methods 47

    1991

  117. [125]

    Hans-Peter Kriegel and Martin Pfeifle. 2005. Density-based clustering of uncertain data. In Proceedings of the eleventh ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery in data mining . 672–677

    2005

  118. [126]

    Sanjay Krishnan, Aaron J Elmore, Michael Franklin, John Paparrizos, Zechao Shang, Adam Dziedzic, and Rui Liu. 2019. Artificial intelligence in resource-constrained and shared environments. ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review 53, 1 (2019), 1–6

    2019

  119. [127]

    Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey E Hinton. 2012. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Advances in neural information processing systems 25 (2012)

    2012

  120. [128]

    Mahesh Kumar, Nitin R Patel, and Jonathan Woo. 2002. Clustering seasonality patterns in the presence of errors. In Proceedings of the eighth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining . 557–563

    2002

  121. [129]

    Vladimir Kurbalija, Charlotte von Bernstorff, Hans-Dieter Burkhard, Jens Nachtwei, Mirjana Ivanović, and Lidija Fodor. 2012. Time-Series Mining in a Psychological Domain. In Proceedings of the Fifth Balkan Conference in Informatics (Novi Sad, Serbia) (BCI ’12). Association for...

    2012

  122. [130]

    Baptiste Lafabregue, Jonathan Weber, Pierre Gançarski, and Germain Forestier. 2021. End-to-end deep representation learning for time series clustering: a comparative study. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery (2021), 1–53

    2021

  123. [131]

    Qi Lei, Jinfeng Yi, Roman Vaculin, Lingfei Wu, and Inderjit S. Dhillon. 2019. Similarity Preserving Representation Learning for Time Series Clustering. In Proceedings of the 28th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Macao, China) (IJCAI’19). AAAI Press, 2845–2851

    2019

  124. [132]

    Aimin Li, Siqi Xiong, Junhuai Li, Saurav Mallik, Yajun Liu, Rong Fei, Hongfang Zhou, and Guangming Liu. 2022. AngClust: angle feature-based clustering for short time series gene expression profiles. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics 20, 2 (2022)...

    2022

  125. [133]

    Cen Li and Gautam Biswas. 1999. Temporal pattern generation using hidden Markov model based unsupervised classification. In International Symposium on Intelligent Data Analysis . Springer, 245–256

    1999

  126. [134]

    Cen Li, Gautam Biswas, Mike Dale, and Pat Dale. 2001. Building models of ecological dynamics using HMM based temporal data clustering—a preliminary study. In International Symposium on Intelligent Data Analysis . Springer, 53–62

    2001

  127. [135]

    Guozhong Li, Byron Choi, Jianliang Xu, Sourav S Bhowmick, Kwok-Pan Chun, and Grace Lai-Hung Wong. 2021. ShapeNet: A Shapelet-Neural Network Approach for Multivariate Time Series Classification. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 35, 9 (May 2021), 837...

    2021 doi

  128. [136]

    Hailin Li and Manhua Chen. 2023. Time series clustering based on normal cloud model and complex network. Applied Soft Computing 148 (2023), 110876

    2023

  129. [137]

    Hailin Li, Xianli Wu, Xiaoji Wan, and Weibin Lin. 2022. Time series clustering via matrix profile and community detection. Advanced Engineering Informatics 54 (2022), 101771

    2022

  130. [138]

    Junnan Li, Pan Zhou, Caiming Xiong, and Steven C.H. Hoi. 2021. Prototypical Contrastive Learning of Unsupervised Representations. In ICLR

    2021

  131. [139]

    Xiaosheng Li, Jessica Lin, and Liang Zhao. 2021. Time series clustering in linear time complexity. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 35 (2021), 2369–2388

    2021

  132. [140]

    Xiang Li, Jinglu Wang, Xiaohao Xu, Muqiao Yang, Fan Yang, Yizhou Zhao, Rita Singh, and Bhiksha Raj. 2023. Towards Noise-Tolerant Speech- Referring Video Object Segmentation: Bridging Speech and Text. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Languag...

    2023

  133. [141]

    Zhiyu Liang, Jianfeng Zhang, Chen Liang, Hongzhi Wang, Zheng Liang, and Lujia Pan. 2023. Contrastive Shapelet Learning for Unsupervised Multivariate Time Series Representation Learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.18888 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  134. [142]

    TW Liao, B Bolt, J Forester, E Hailman, C Hansen, RC Kaste, and J O’May. 2002. Understanding and projecting the battle state. In23rd Army Science Conference, Orlando, FL, Vol. 25

    2002

  135. [143]

    T Warren Liao. 2005. Clustering of time series data—a survey. Pattern recognition 38, 11 (2005), 1857–1874

    2005

  136. [144]

    Jessica Lin, Eamonn Keogh, Stefano Lonardi, and Bill Chiu. 2003. A symbolic representation of time series, with implications for streaming algorithms. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGMOD workshop on Research issues in data mining and knowledge discovery . 2–11

    2003

  137. [145]

    Jessica Lin, Eamonn Keogh, Li Wei, and Stefano Lonardi. 2007. Experiencing SAX: a novel symbolic representation of time series. Data Mining and knowledge discovery 15, 2 (2007), 107–144

    2007

  138. [146]

    Jessica Lin, Michail Vlachos, Eamonn Keogh, and Dimitrios Gunopulos. 2004. Iterative incremental clustering of time series. In International Conference on Extending Database Technology . Springer, 106–122

    2004

  139. [147]

    Chunwei Liu, Hao Jiang, John Paparrizos, and Aaron J Elmore. 2021. Decomposed bounded floats for fast compression and queries. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 14, 11 (2021), 2586–2598

    2021

  140. [148]

    Chunwei Liu, John Paparrizos, and Aaron J Elmore. 2024. Adaedge: A dynamic compression selection framework for resource constrained devices. In 2024 IEEE 40th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) . IEEE, 1506–1519

    2024

  141. [149]

    Qinghua Liu, Paul Boniol, Themis Palpanas, and John Paparrizos. 2024. Time-Series Anomaly Detection: Overview and New Trends. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment (PVLDB) 17, 12 (2024), 4229–4232

    2024

  142. [150]

    Qinghua Liu and John Paparrizos. 2024. The Elephant in the Room: Towards A Reliable Time-Series Anomaly Detection Benchmark. In NeurIPS 2024. Manuscript submitted to ACM 48 Paparrizos et al

    2024

  143. [151]

    Shinan Liu, Tarun Mangla, Ted Shaowang, Jinjin Zhao, John Paparrizos, Sanjay Krishnan, and Nick Feamster. 2023. Amir: Active multimodal interaction recognition from video and network traffic in connected environments. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and...

    2023

  144. [152]

    Arnaud Lods, Simon Malinowski, Romain Tavenard, and Laurent Amsaleg. 2017. Learning DTW-preserving shapelets. In Advances in Intelligent Data Analysis XVI: 16th International Symposium, IDA 2017, London, UK, October 26–28, 2017, Proceedings 16 . Springer, 198–209

    2017

  145. [153]

    David G Lowe. 2004. Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. International journal of computer vision 60 (2004), 91–110

    2004

  146. [154]

    Carl H Lubba, Sarab S Sethi, Philip Knaute, Simon R Schultz, Ben D Fulcher, and Nick S Jones. 2019. catch22: CAnonical Time-series CHaracteristics: Selected through highly comparative time-series analysis. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 33, 6 (2019), 1821–1852

    2019

  147. [155]

    Maciej Łuczak. 2016. Hierarchical clustering of time series data with parametric derivative dynamic time warping. Expert Systems with Applications 62 (2016), 116–130

    2016

  148. [156]

    Linghao Luo and Shu Lv. 2020. An accelerated u-shapelet time series clustering method with lsh. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series , Vol. 1631. IOP Publishing, 012077

    2020

  149. [157]

    Zhixue Luo, Lin Zhang, Na Liu, and Ye Wu. 2023. Time series clustering of COVID-19 pandemic-related data. Data Science and Management 6, 2 (2023), 79–87

    2023

  150. [159]

    Cottrell

    Qianli Ma, Chuxin Chen, Sen Li, and Garrison W. Cottrell. 2021. Learning Representations for Incomplete Time Series Clustering. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 35, 10 (May 2021), 8837–8846. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v35i10.17070

    2021 doi

  151. [160]

    Qianli Ma, Jiawei Zheng, Sen Li, and Gary W Cottrell. 2019. Learning representations for time series clustering. Advances in neural information processing systems 32 (2019)

    2019

  152. [161]

    James MacQueen et al . 1967. Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability , Vol. 1. Oakland, CA, USA, 281–297

    1967

  153. [162]

    Naveen Sai Madiraju. 2018. Deep temporal clustering: Fully unsupervised learning of time-domain features . Ph. D. Dissertation. Arizona State University

    2018

  154. [163]

    Elizabeth Ann Maharaj. 2000. Cluster of Time Series. Journal of Classification 17, 2 (2000)

    2000

  155. [164]

    Simon Malinowski, Thomas Guyet, René Quiniou, and Romain Tavenard. 2013. 1d-sax: A novel symbolic representation for time series. In International Symposium on Intelligent Data Analysis . Springer, 273–284

    2013

  156. [165]

    Laura Manduchi, Matthias Hüser, Julia Vogt, Gunnar Rätsch, and Vincent Fortuin. 2019. DPSOM: Deep probabilistic clustering with self-organizing maps. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.01590 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  157. [166]

    Kathy McKeown, Hal Daume III, Snigdha Chaturvedi, John Paparrizos, Kapil Thadani, Pablo Barrio, Or Biran, Suvarna Bothe, Michael Collins, Kenneth R Fleischmann, et al. 2016. Predicting the impact of scientific concepts using full-text features. Journal of the Association for I...

    2016

  158. [167]

    Marina Meilă. 2007. Comparing clusterings—an information based distance. Journal of multivariate analysis 98, 5 (2007), 873–895

    2007

  159. [168]

    Qianwen Meng, Hangwei Qian, Yong Liu, Lizhen Cui, Yonghui Xu, and Zhiqi Shen. 2023. MHCCL: masked hierarchical cluster-wise contrastive learning for multivariate time series. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , Vol. 37. 9153–9161

    2023

  160. [169]

    Tomas Mikolov, Ilya Sutskever, Kai Chen, Greg S Corrado, and Jeff Dean. 2013. Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. Advances in neural information processing systems 26 (2013)

    2013

  161. [170]

    Carla S Möller-Levet, Frank Klawonn, Kwang-Hyun Cho, and Olaf Wolkenhauer. 2003. Fuzzy clustering of short time-series and unevenly distributed sampling points. In International symposium on intelligent data analysis . Springer, 330–340

    2003

  162. [171]

    Tim Oates, Laura Firoiu, and Paul R Cohen. 1999. Clustering time series with hidden markov models and dynamic time warping. In Proceedings of the IJCAI-99 workshop on neural, symbolic and reinforcement learning methods for sequence learning . Citeseer, 17–21

    1999

  163. [172]

    Aaron van den Oord, Yazhe Li, and Oriol Vinyals. 2018. Representation learning with contrastive predictive coding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.03748 (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  164. [173]

    Mert Ozer, Anna Sapienza, Andrés Abeliuk, Goran Muric, and Emilio Ferrara. 2020. Discovering patterns of online popularity from time series. Expert Systems with Applications 151 (2020), 113337

    2020

  165. [174]

    Ioannis Paparrizos. 2018. Fast, scalable, and accurate algorithms for time-series analysis . Ph. D. Dissertation. Columbia University

    2018

  166. [175]

    John Paparrizos, Paul Boniol, Themis Palpanas, Ruey S Tsay, Aaron Elmore, and Michael J Franklin. 2022. Volume under the surface: a new accuracy evaluation measure for time-series anomaly detection. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 15, 11 (2022), 2774–2787

    2022

  167. [176]

    John Paparrizos, Ikraduya Edian, Chunwei Liu, Aaron J Elmore, and Michael J Franklin. 2022. Fast adaptive similarity search through variance-aware quantization. In 2022 IEEE 38th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) . IEEE, 2969–2983

    2022

  168. [177]

    John Paparrizos and Michael J Franklin. 2019. Grail: efficient time-series representation learning. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 12, 11 (2019), 1762–1777

    2019

  169. [178]

    John Paparrizos and Luis Gravano. 2015. k-shape: Efficient and accurate clustering of time series. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of data . 1855–1870

    2015

  170. [179]

    John Paparrizos and Luis Gravano. 2017. Fast and accurate time-series clustering. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS) 42, 2 (2017), 1–49. Manuscript submitted to ACM Bridging the Gap: A Decade Review of Time-Series Clustering Methods 49

    2017

  171. [180]

    John Paparrizos, Yuhao Kang, Paul Boniol, Ruey S Tsay, Themis Palpanas, and Michael J Franklin. 2022. TSB-UAD: an end-to-end benchmark suite for univariate time-series anomaly detection. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 15, 8 (2022), 1697–1711

    2022

  172. [181]

    John Paparrizos, Chunwei Liu, Bruno Barbarioli, Johnny Hwang, Ikraduya Edian, Aaron J Elmore, Michael J Franklin, and Sanjay Krishnan. 2021. VergeDB: A Database for IoT Analytics on Edge Devices.. In CIDR

    2021

  173. [182]

    John Paparrizos, Chunwei Liu, Aaron J Elmore, and Michael J Franklin. 2020. Debunking four long-standing misconceptions of time-series distance measures. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of data . 1887–1905

    2020

  174. [183]

    Elmore, and Michael J

    John Paparrizos, Chunwei Liu, Aaron J. Elmore, and Michael J. Franklin. 2023. Querying Time-Series Data: A Comprehensive Comparison of Distance Measures. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 46, 3 (2023), 69–88. http://sites.computer.org/debull/A23sept/p69.pdf

    2023

  175. [184]

    John Paparrizos and Sai Prasanna Teja Reddy. 2023. Odyssey: An engine enabling the time-series clustering journey. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 16, 12 (2023), 4066–4069

    2023

  176. [185]

    John Paparrizos, Ryen W White, and Eric Horvitz. 2016. Detecting devastating diseases in search logs. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining . 559–568

    2016

  177. [186]

    John Paparrizos, Ryen W White, and Eric Horvitz. 2016. Screening for pancreatic adenocarcinoma using signals from web search logs: Feasibility study and results. Journal of oncology practice 12, 8 (2016), 737–744

    2016

  178. [187]

    John Paparrizos, Kaize Wu, Aaron Elmore, Christos Faloutsos, and Michael J Franklin. 2023. Accelerating similarity search for elastic measures: A study and new generalization of lower bounding distances. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 16, 8 (2023), 2019–2032

    2023

  179. [188]

    Nicos G Pavlidis, Vassilis P Plagianakos, Dimitris K Tasoulis, and Michael N Vrahatis. 2006. Financial forecasting through unsupervised clustering and neural networks. Operational Research 6, 2 (2006), 103–127

    2006

  180. [189]

    Karl Pearson. 1901. LIII. On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin philosophical magazine and journal of science 2, 11 (1901), 559–572

    1901

  181. [190]

    François Petitjean, Alain Ketterlin, and Pierre Gançarski. 2011. A global averaging method for dynamic time warping, with applications to clustering. Pattern recognition 44, 3 (2011), 678–693

    2011

  182. [191]

    Domenico Piccolo. 1990. A distance measure for classifying ARIMA models. Journal of time series analysis 11, 2 (1990), 153–164

    1990

  183. [192]

    Shai Policker and Amir B Geva. 2000. Nonstationary time series analysis by temporal clustering.IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) 30, 2 (2000), 339–343

    2000

  184. [193]

    Jiang Qian, Marisa Dolled-Filhart, Jimmy Lin, Haiyuan Yu, and Mark Gerstein. 2001. Beyond synexpression relationships: local clustering of time-shifted and inverted gene expression profiles identifies new, biologically relevant interactions. Journal of molecular biology 314, 5...

    2001

  185. [194]

    Marco Ramoni, Paola Sebastiani, and Paul Cohen. 2000. Multivariate clustering by dynamics. In AAAI/IAAI. 633–638

    2000

  186. [195]

    William M Rand. 1971. Objective criteria for the evaluation of clustering methods. Journal of the American Statistical association 66, 336 (1971), 846–850

    1971

  187. [196]

    Teemu Räsänen and Mikko Kolehmainen. 2009. Feature-based clustering for electricity use time series data. In Adaptive and Natural Computing Algorithms: 9th International Conference, ICANNGA 2009, Kuopio, Finland, April 23-25, 2009, Revised Selected Papers 9 . Springer, 401–412

    2009

  188. [197]

    Chotirat Ratanamahatana, Eamonn Keogh, Anthony J Bagnall, and Stefano Lonardi. 2005. A novel bit level time series representation with implication of similarity search and clustering. In Pacific-Asia conference on knowledge discovery and data mining . Springer, 771–777

    2005

  189. [198]

    Chotirat Ann Ratanamahatana and Eamonn Keogh. 2005. Three myths about dynamic time warping data mining. In Proceedings of the 2005 SIAM international conference on data mining . SIAM, 506–510

    2005

  190. [199]

    LKPJ Rdusseeun and P Kaufman. 1987. Clustering by means of medoids. InProceedings of the statistical data analysis based on the L1 norm conference, neuchatel, switzerland, Vol. 31

    1987

  191. [200]

    Lei Ren, Yongchang Wei, Jin Cui, and Yi Du. 2017. A sliding window-based multi-stage clustering and probabilistic forecasting approach for large multivariate time series data. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 87, 13 (2017), 2494–2508

    2017

  192. [201]

    Pedro Pereira Rodrigues, Joao Gama, and Joao Pedroso. 2008. Hierarchical clustering of time-series data streams. IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering 20, 5 (2008), 615–627

    2008

  193. [202]

    Alex Rodriguez and Alessandro Laio. 2014. Clustering by fast search and find of density peaks. science 344, 6191 (2014), 1492–1496

    2014

  194. [203]

    Frank Rosenblatt. 1958. The perceptron: a probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain. Psychological review 65, 6 (1958), 386

    1958

  195. [204]

    Peter J Rousseeuw. 1987. Silhouettes: a graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of computational and applied mathematics 20 (1987), 53–65

    1987

  196. [205]

    David E Rumelhart, Geoffrey E Hinton, and Ronald J Williams. 1986. Learning representations by back-propagating errors. nature 323, 6088 (1986), 533–536

    1986

  197. [206]

    Nicholas Ruta, Naoko Sawada, Katy McKeough, Michael Behrisch, and Johanna Beyer. 2019. Sax navigator: Time series exploration through hierarchical clustering. In 2019 IEEE Visualization Conference (VIS) . IEEE, 236–240

    2019

  198. [207]

    Hiroaki Sakoe and Seibi Chiba. 1978. Dynamic programming algorithm optimization for spoken word recognition. IEEE transactions on acoustics, speech, and signal processing 26, 1 (1978), 43–49

    1978

  199. [208]

    Patrick Schäfer and Mikael Högqvist. 2012. SFA: a symbolic fourier approximation and index for similarity search in high dimensional datasets. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Extending Database Technology (Berlin, Germany) (EDBT ’12). Association for Com...

    2012

  200. [209]

    Onur Seref, Ya-Ju Fan, and Wanpracha Art Chaovalitwongse. 2014. Mathematical programming formulations and algorithms for discrete k-median clustering of time-series data. INFORMS Journal on Computing 26, 1 (2014), 160–172

    2014

  201. [210]

    Vivek Sharma, Makarand Tapaswi, M Saquib Sarfraz, and Rainer Stiefelhagen. 2020. Clustering based contrastive learning for improving face representations. In 2020 15th IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition (FG 2020) . IEEE, 109–116

    2020

  202. [211]

    CT Shaw and GP King. 1992. Using cluster analysis to classify time series. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 58, 1-4 (1992), 288–298

    1992

  203. [212]

    Jin Shieh and Eamonn Keogh. 2009. iSAX: disk-aware mining and indexing of massive time series datasets. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 19, 1 (2009), 24–57

    2009

  204. [213]

    Robert H Shumway. 2003. Time-frequency clustering and discriminant analysis. Statistics & probability letters 63, 3 (2003), 307–314

    2003

  205. [214]

    Karen Simonyan and Andrew Zisserman. 2014. Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1556 (2014)

    2014 arXiv

  206. [215]

    Alexandra Stefan, Vassilis Athitsos, and Gautam Das. 2012. The move-split-merge metric for time series. IEEE transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 25, 6 (2012), 1425–1438

    2012

  207. [216]

    Michael Steinbach, Pang-Ning Tan, Vipin Kumar, Steven Klooster, and Christopher Potter. 2003. Discovery of Climate Indices Using Clustering. In Proceedings of the Ninth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (Washington, D.C.) (KDD ’03). Ass...

    2003

  208. [217]

    Adrian Stetco, Xiao-jun Zeng, and John Keane. 2013. Fuzzy cluster analysis of financial time series and their volatility assessment. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics . IEEE, 91–96

    2013

  209. [218]

    Alexander Strehl and Joydeep Ghosh. 2002. Cluster ensembles—a knowledge reuse framework for combining multiple partitions. Journal of machine learning research 3, Dec (2002), 583–617

    2002

  210. [219]

    Colin Studholme, Derek LG Hill, and David J Hawkes. 1999. An overlap invariant entropy measure of 3D medical image alignment. Pattern recognition 32, 1 (1999), 71–86

    1999

  211. [220]

    Numanul Subhani, Luis Rueda, Alioune Ngom, and Conrad J Burden. 2010. Multiple gene expression profile alignment for microarray time-series data clustering. Bioinformatics 26, 18 (2010), 2281–2288

    2010

  212. [221]

    Mukund Subramaniyan, Anders Skoogh, Azam Sheikh Muhammad, Jon Bokrantz, Björn Johansson, and Christoph Roser. 2020. A generic hierarchical clustering approach for detecting bottlenecks in manufacturing. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 55 (2020), 143–158

    2020

  213. [222]

    Emmanouil Sylligardos, Paul Boniol, John Paparrizos, Panos Trahanias, and Themis Palpanas. 2023. Choose wisely: An extensive evaluation of model selection for anomaly detection in time series. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 16, 11 (2023), 3418–3432

    2023

  214. [223]

    Xue Wang Liang Sun Rong Jin Tian Zhou, Peisong Niu. 2023. One Fits All: Power General Time Series Analysis by Pretrained LM. In NeurIPS

    2023

  215. [224]

    Donato Tiano, Angela Bonifati, and Raymond Ng. 2021. FeatTS: Feature-based time series clustering. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Management of Data . 2784–2788

    2021

  216. [225]

    Donato Tiano, Angela Bonifati, and Raymond Ng. 2021. Feature-driven time series clustering. In 24th International Conference on Extending Database Technology, EDBT 2021

    2021

  217. [226]

    Sana Tonekaboni, Danny Eytan, and Anna Goldenberg. 2021. Unsupervised Representation Learning for Time Series with Temporal Neighborhood Coding. In International Conference on Learning Representations . https://openreview.net/forum?id=8qDwejCuCN

    2021

  218. [227]

    Dat Tran and Michael Wagner. 2002. Fuzzy C-Means Clustering-Based Speaker Verification. In Advances in Soft Computing — AFSS 2002 , Nikhil R. Pal and Michio Sugeno (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 318–324

    2002

  219. [228]

    Daniel J Trosten, Andreas S Strauman, Michael Kampffmeyer, and Robert Jenssen. 2019. Recurrent deep divergence-based clustering for simultaneous feature learning and clustering of variable length time series. In ICASSP 2019-2019 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Spee...

    2019

  220. [229]

    Liudmila Ulanova, Nurjahan Begum, and Eamonn Keogh. 2015. Scalable clustering of time series with u-shapelets. In Proceedings of the 2015 SIAM international conference on data mining . SIAM, 900–908

    2015

  221. [230]

    Jarke J Van Wijk and Edward R Van Selow. 1999. Cluster and calendar based visualization of time series data. In Proceedings 1999 IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization (InfoVis’ 99) . IEEE, 4–9

    1999

  222. [231]

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017)

    2017

  223. [232]

    Petar Veličković, Guillem Cucurull, Arantxa Casanova, Adriana Romero, Pietro Liò, and Yoshua Bengio. 2018. Graph Attention Networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations . https://openreview.net/forum?id=rJXMpikCZ

    2018

  224. [233]

    Michail Vlachos, George Kollios, and Dimitrios Gunopulos. 2002. Discovering similar multidimensional trajectories. InProceedings 18th international conference on data engineering . IEEE, 673–684

    2002

  225. [234]

    Xiaozhe Wang, Kate Smith, and Rob Hyndman. 2006. Characteristic-based clustering for time series data. Data mining and knowledge Discovery 13 (2006), 335–364

    2006

  226. [235]

    Xiaozhe Wang, Kate A Smith, and Rob J Hyndman. 2005. Dimension reduction for clustering time series using global characteristics. InInternational Conference on Computational Science . Springer, 792–795

    2005

  227. [236]

    Xiaozhe Wang, Anthony Wirth, and Liang Wang. 2007. Structure-based statistical features and multivariate time series clustering. In Seventh IEEE international conference on data mining (ICDM 2007) . IEEE, 351–360. Manuscript submitted to ACM Bridging the Gap: A Decade Review o...

    2007

  228. [237]

    Joe H Ward Jr. 1963. Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal of the American statistical association 58, 301 (1963), 236–244

    1963

  229. [238]

    J Wilpon and L Rabiner. 1985. A modified K-means clustering algorithm for use in isolated work recognition. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing 33, 3 (1985), 587–594

    1985

  230. [239]

    Axel Wismüller, Oliver Lange, Dominik R Dersch, Gerda L Leinsinger, Klaus Hahn, Benno Pütz, and Dorothee Auer. 2002. Cluster analysis of biomedical image time-series. International Journal of Computer Vision 46, 2 (2002), 103–128

    2002

  231. [240]

    Jun Wu, Zelin Zhang, Rui Tong, Yuan Zhou, Zhengfa Hu, and Kaituo Liu. 2023. Imaging feature-based clustering of financial time series. Plos one 18, 7 (2023), e0288836

    2023

  232. [241]

    Zhirong Wu, Yuanjun Xiong, Stella X Yu, and Dahua Lin. 2018. Unsupervised feature learning via non-parametric instance discrimination. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition . 3733–3742

    2018

  233. [242]

    Andreas Wunsch, Tanja Liesch, and Stefan Broda. 2022. Feature-based groundwater hydrograph clustering using unsupervised self-organizing map-ensembles. Water Resources Management 36, 1 (2022), 39–54

    2022

  234. [243]

    Zhiwen Xiao, Huanlai Xing, Bowen Zhao, Rong Qu, Shouxi Luo, Penglin Dai, Ke Li, and Zonghai Zhu. 2023. Deep Contrastive Representation Learning with Self-Distillation. IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence (2023)

    2023

  235. [244]

    Junyuan Xie, Ross Girshick, and Ali Farhadi. 2016. Unsupervised deep embedding for clustering analysis. In International conference on machine learning. PMLR, 478–487

    2016

  236. [245]

    Yimin Xiong and Dit-Yan Yeung. 2002. Mixtures of ARMA models for model-based time series clustering. In 2002 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, 2002. Proceedings. IEEE, 717–720

    2002

  237. [246]

    Chenxiao Xu, Hao Huang, and Shinjae Yoo. 2021. A deep neural network for multivariate time series clustering with result interpretation. In 2021 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) . IEEE, 1–8

    2021

  238. [247]

    Ziwei Xu, Xudong Shen, Yongkang Wong, and Mohan S Kankanhalli. 2021. Unsupervised motion representation learning with capsule autoencoders. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34 (2021), 3205–3217

    2021

  239. [248]

    Bo Yang, Xiao Fu, Nicholas D Sidiropoulos, and Mingyi Hong. 2017. Towards k-means-friendly spaces: Simultaneous deep learning and clustering. In international conference on machine learning . PMLR, 3861–3870

    2017

  240. [249]

    Fan Yang, Muqiao Yang, Xiang Li, Yuxuan Wu, Zhiyuan Zhao, Bhiksha Raj, and Rita Singh. 2024. A closer look at reinforcement learning-based automatic speech recognition. Computer Speech & Language 87 (2024), 101641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csl.2024.101641

    2024

  241. [250]

    Jaewon Yang and Jure Leskovec. 2011. Patterns of temporal variation in online media. In Proceedings of the fourth ACM international conference on Web search and data mining. 177–186

    2011

  242. [251]

    Ling Yang and Shenda Hong. 2022. Unsupervised time-series representation learning with iterative bilinear temporal-spectral fusion. InInternational Conference on Machine Learning . PMLR, 25038–25054

    2022

  243. [252]

    Xinyu Yang, Zhenguo Zhang, and Rongyi Cui. 2022. Timeclr: A self-supervised contrastive learning framework for univariate time series representation. Knowledge-Based Systems 245 (2022), 108606

    2022

  244. [253]

    Lexiang Ye and Eamonn Keogh. 2009. Time series shapelets: a new primitive for data mining. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining . 947–956

    2009

  245. [254]

    Chin-Chia Michael Yeh, Yan Zhu, Liudmila Ulanova, Nurjahan Begum, Yifei Ding, Hoang Anh Dau, Diego Furtado Silva, Abdullah Mueen, and Eamonn Keogh. 2016. Matrix Profile I: All Pairs Similarity Joins for Time Series: A Unifying View That Includes Motifs, Discords and Shapelets....

    2016

  246. [255]

    Byoung-Kee Yi and Christos Faloutsos. 2000. Fast time sequence indexing for arbitrary Lp norms. (2000)

    2000

  247. [256]

    Zhihan Yue, Yujing Wang, Juanyong Duan, Tianmeng Yang, Congrui Huang, Yunhai Tong, and Bixiong Xu. 2022. Ts2vec: Towards universal representation of time series. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , Vol. 36. 8980–8987

    2022

  248. [257]

    Jesin Zakaria, Abdullah Mueen, and Eamonn Keogh. 2012. Clustering time series using unsupervised-shapelets. In 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on Data Mining . IEEE, 785–794

    2012

  249. [258]

    George Zerveas, Srideepika Jayaraman, Dhaval Patel, Anuradha Bhamidipaty, and Carsten Eickhoff. 2021. A transformer-based framework for multivariate time series representation learning. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGKDD conference on knowledge discovery & data mining . 2114–2124

    2021

  250. [259]

    Hongjun Zhang, Jing Wang, Qinfeng Xiao, Jiaoxue Deng, and Youfang Lin. 2021. Sleeppriorcl: Contrastive representation learning with prior knowledge-based positive mining and adaptive temperature for sleep staging. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.09966 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  251. [260]

    Nan Zhang and Shiliang Sun. 2022. Multiview unsupervised shapelet learning for multivariate time series clustering. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 45, 4 (2022), 4981–4996

    2022

  252. [261]

    Qin Zhang, Jia Wu, Hong Yang, Yingjie Tian, and Chengqi Zhang. 2016. Unsupervised feature learning from time series.. In IJCAI. New York, USA, 2322–2328

    2016

  253. [262]

    Qin Zhang, Jia Wu, Peng Zhang, Guodong Long, and Chengqi Zhang. 2018. Salient subsequence learning for time series clustering.IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 41, 9 (2018), 2193–2207

    2018

  254. [263]

    Xiaohang Zhang, Jiaqi Liu, Yu Du, and Tingjie Lv. 2011. A novel clustering method on time series data. Expert Systems with Applications 38, 9 (2011), 11891–11900

    2011

  255. [264]

    Xiang Zhang, Ziyuan Zhao, Theodoros Tsiligkaridis, and Marinka Zitnik. 2022. Self-supervised contrastive pre-training for time series via time-frequency consistency. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), 3988–4003. Manuscript submitted to ACM 52 Paparrizos et al

    2022

  256. [265]

    Zheng Zhang, Xuzhi Lai, Min Wu, Luefeng Chen, Chengda Lu, and Sheng Du. 2021. Fault diagnosis based on feature clustering of time series data for loss and kick of drilling process. Journal of Process Control 102 (2021), 24–33

    2021

  257. [266]

    Ying Zhong, Dong Huang, and Chang-Dong Wang. 2023. Deep Temporal Contrastive Clustering. Neural Processing Letters (2023), 1–17

    2023

  258. [267]

    Yan Zhu, Zachary Zimmerman, Nader Shakibay Senobari, Chin-Chia Michael Yeh, Gareth Funning, Abdullah Mueen, Philip Brisk, and Eamonn Keogh. 2016. Matrix Profile II: Exploiting a Novel Algorithm and GPUs to Break the One Hundred Million Barrier for Time Series Motifs and Joins....

    2016

  259. [268]

    Robert J Zupko, Tran Dang Nguyen, J Claude S Ngabonziza, Michee Kabera, Haojun Li, Thu Nguyen-Anh Tran, Kien Trung Tran, Aline Uwimana, and Maciej F Boni. 2023. Modeling policy interventions for slowing the spread of artemisinin-resistant pfkelch R561H mutations in Rwanda. Nat...

    2023

  260. [2010]

    In 2010 IEEE International Conference on Sensor Networks, Ubiquitous, and Trustworthy Computing

    Effective metadata management in federated sensor networks. In 2010 IEEE International Conference on Sensor Networks, Ubiquitous, and Trustworthy Computing. IEEE, 107–114

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.