ClusBench: The Clustering Benchmark Data Resource You've All Been Waiting For (?)

In recent years, text clustering has become a critical technique for applications including intent discovery, topic mining, and recommendation systems. However, evaluating text clustering algorithms remains challenging since many real-world textual datasets are not suitable for clustering assessment due to ambiguous semantic boundaries, the high dimensionality of embeddings, and inconsistent cluster structure. Current clustering dataset generators are designed for numerical data, providing limited support for text-specific benchmarking. This paper introduces TextClusterLab, a comprehensive framework for text clustering research. TextClusterLab offers a Large Language Model (LLM)-driven text clustering dataset generator to produce synthetic text datasets for evaluating clustering algorithms. This generator supports setting various clustering attributes, such as class imbalance, intra-cluster compactness, and inter-cluster diversity. These generated datasets can serve as practical benchmarks for testing the robustness and versatility of text clustering algorithms in diverse scenarios. Moreover, we introduce a benchmark to verify whether a text dataset is suitable for clustering evaluation. Therefore, TextClusterLab provides an integrated framework for reproducible and comprehensive text-specific clustering research. Our TextClusterLab is publicly available at https://github.com/research-paper-code/TextClusterLab, and some synthetic example datasets with various attributes are publicly available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/DW-irlab/TextClusterLab.

Clustering is a fundamental problem in data science with a long-standing research history, yielding numerous insightful algorithms. Despite this progress, a systematic and large-scale empirical evaluation that jointly considers conventional algorithms, deep learning-based methods, and recent foundation model-based clustering remains largely absent, leading to limited guidance on algorithm selection and deployment. To address this gap, we introduce CLUBench, a comprehensive clustering benchmark comprising 24 algorithms of diverse principles evaluated on 131 datasets across tabular, text, and image data, involving 178,815 experiments. Importantly, our analyses of (i) the impact of hyperparameter tuning,(ii) the impact of data types and characteristics,(iii) the impact of pretrained embeddings,(iv) large language model-based clustering,(v) the similarity of algorithms, and (vi) the low-rank structures of performance matrices, yield meaningful insights and promising pathways for clustering research. For instance, our study reveals that: 1) All evaluated deep clustering methods do not exhibit a significant advantage compared with the top-performing conventional clustering algorithms (e.g., KMeans, SpeClu) in terms of average performance; 2) For image and text clustering tasks, combining pretrained embeddings with conventional clustering algorithms (e.g., KMeans, SpeClu) offers effective and efficient clustering; 3) Clustering remains a challenging and nontrivial problem, even in the era of increasingly dominant foundation models. Moreover, we propose to use the low-rank structure in cross-model performance matrices to efficiently approximate the overall performance evaluation in practical applications. We further demonstrate the feasibility of model selection based on the performance matrices across all hyperparameter configurations.

Clustering is widely used across the sciences as the foundation for downstream data-driven scientific discoveries. However, clustering results are highly sensitive to the choice of algorithm, preprocessing, and the number of clusters $k$, producing scientific claims that are often not reproducible. The current state of the art for validating clustering solutions consists of clustering validation indices (CVIs) such as Silhouette, Davies-Bouldin, and Calinski-Harabasz, which rely on geometric assumptions that break down on the heavy-tailed, high-dimensional, and nonlinearly structured data encountered in biomedical research. Resampling-based alternatives - grounded in the ideas of clustering stability and generalizability - have been proposed but remain scattered across specialized tools with no unified, accessible software. We fill this gap with CARVE (Cluster Analysis with Resampling for Validation and Exploration), an open-source Python and R package that jointly evaluates multiple clustering algorithms and hyperparameters, returning stability and generalizability diagnostics at the global, cluster, and sample level together with principled selection rules and consensus-based cluster labels. Across six synthetic benchmarks CARVE consistently recovers near-optimal clusterings where classical indices degrade substantially. On experimental genomics and proteomics data sets, CARVE recovers finer biological structure when classical CVIs collapse entirely. CARVE is available with a scikit-learn-compatible Python API and an analogous R interface compatible with Seurat workflows.