Kaviru Gunaratne

Kaviru Gunaratne, Stephen Kobourov, Jacob Miller

Dimensionality reduction (DR) techniques are often characterized by whether they preserve global, high-level structures in the data or local, neighborhood structures. This distinction matters in visualization: global methods can obscure clusters while local methods can over-emphasize them. Yet, even when clusters appear distinct, their relative arrangement in the projection may be arbitrary or misleading, a common issue in techniques such as t-SNE and UMAP. Existing cluster quality metrics either only measure cluster separability or assume spherical, globular clusters in the original space. We introduce the Class Angular Distortion Index (CADI), a metric that uses internal angles among point triples to determine the faithfulness of cluster organization in a projection. We show cases on both real and synthetic data where existing cluster metrics fail, but CADI provides an interpretable result. Since it relies on computing angles, CADI is also differentiable, enabling optimization. We demonstrate this with a CADI-based DR technique.

Kiran Smelser, Kaviru Gunaratne, Jacob Miller et al.

Complex, high-dimensional data is ubiquitous across many scientific disciplines, including machine learning, biology, and the social sciences. One of the primary methods of visualizing these datasets is with two-dimensional scatter plots that visually capture some properties of the data. Because visually determining the accuracy of these plots is challenging, researchers often use quality metrics to measure the projection's accuracy and faithfulness to the original data. One of the most commonly employed metrics, normalized stress, is sensitive to uniform scaling (stretching, shrinking) of the projection, despite this act not meaningfully changing anything about the projection. Another quality metric, the Kullback--Leibler (KL) divergence used in the popular t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (t-SNE) technique, is also susceptible to this scale sensitivity. We investigate the effect of scaling on stress and KL divergence analytically and empirically by showing just how much the values change and how this affects dimension reduction technique evaluations. We introduce a simple technique to make both metrics scale-invariant and show that it accurately captures expected behavior on a small benchmark.