Drawing Lines in Psychological Space: What K-means Clustering Reveals in Simulated and Real Psychometric Data

The classical $k$-means clustering cannot be directly used to incomplete data, and existing $k$-means-based clustering for missing data primarily focus on improving the practical accuracy of clustering, whereas most of them lack theoretical guarantees in the asymptotic sense. In this paper, we investigate the statistical properties of $k$-means clustering in the presence of missing data. We first establish the $\sqrt{n}$-excess risk bound and prove the consistency of the estimated cluster centers under general missing mechanisms. For the Missing Completely at Random (MCAR) mechanism, we further derive the $\sqrt{n}$-convergence rate and asymptotic normality of the estimated cluster centers. Moreover, we study in what cases the cluster centers estimated by incomplete data converge to the true cluster centers of original fully observed data, and give a sufficient condition about the missing probability and the separation among true clusters. These results provide a theoretical guarantee for missing-data-$k$-means. Notably, our analysis reveal that under MCAR mechanism, both achieving the $\sqrt{n}$-rate and converging to the true cluster centers require $k$ true centers to be distinct in every dimension, highlighting the significant challenges of application in high-dimensional regimes. Finally, we conduct numerical simulations on synthetic incomplete datasets to support our theoretical analysis results.

The classical $k$-means clustering, based on distances computed from all data features, cannot be directly applied to incomplete data with missing values. A natural extension of $k$-means to missing data is to involve only the observed positions in clustering, which is equivalent to imputing missing values by corresponding cluster means. However, for data missing not at random (MNAR), since missingness is related to data values, such a mean-imputation-based method may lead to the distortion of estimated cluster centers, resulting in a poor clustering result. Since MNAR mechanisms are very common in reality, it is necessary to improve the performance of $k$-means-based clustering methods for such data. In this paper, we focus on a magnitude-decaying MNAR scenario where data is more likely to be missing at positions with smaller absolute values, and we propose a novel $k$-means clustering method based on the constraint of the size of imputation values, which enjoys a good mathematical interpretation. Moreover, we establish the statistical consistency of the estimated cluster centers of the proposed method to the true cluster centers of fully observed data, and solve the optimization of the proposed loss function via an alternative minimization algorithm. Simulation experiments verify the effect of the proposed method in improving clustering results and reducing the bias of estimated cluster centers. Applications to real-world missing data further show the utility of the proposed method.

This methodological study analyzes the effects of collinearity, effective dimensionality, and cluster stability in a 2023 study of US airline profit cycles from 1995 to 2020 by Renold et al., which uses k-means clustering, principal component analysis, and system dynamic modelling.We replicate their clustering experiment in three spaces -- the original 7-dim. raw-variable space, a 3-dim. PC score space, and a 4-dim. PC score space using their dataset. We show that the six-cluster taxonomy is geometrically robust: k-means in 3-PC space produces bit-for-bit identical cluster assignments relative to 7D raw space. As a nonlinearity check we apply kernel PCA under six kernels spanning three families plus a linear baseline. The kernels confirm an intrinsically linear manifold with no detectable curvature. The silhouette criterion reveals that the dataset structurally supports only three clusters, not six. Collinearity in the raw 7D space suppresses the silhouette signal. A kernel ridge regression check confirms no nonlinear accuracy gain over linear ridge once the COVID19 year is excluded. Together, these results argue for clustering on PC scores rather than raw variables in collinearity-prone panel data.