PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 10, 2025Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment19 citations

Time-Series Clustering: A Comprehensive Study of Data Mining, Machine Learning, and Deep Learning Methods

View Full Paper
JPJohn PaparrizosSBSai Prasanna Teja Reddy Bogireddy

Key Points

  • No time-series clustering method significantly outperforms the established k-Shape method, indicating stagnation in progress.
  • Analysis evaluated 84 methods over 128 datasets using rigorous statistical methods, providing a strong benchmark for future work.
  • Explored performance variation across dataset properties, revealing scalability and reproducibility issues in deep learning approaches.
  • Found that deep learning methods, including foundation models, do not consistently outperform traditional methods, challenging previous assumptions.

Abstract

Time-series clustering is a key task in time series analysis, enabling unsupervised data exploration and often serving as a subroutine for other tasks. Despite decades of active cross-disciplinary research, benchmarking of time-series clustering methods has received limited attention. Existing studies have (i) excluded popular methods and entire method classes; (ii) used a narrow range of distance measures; (iii) evaluated only a few datasets; (iv) lacked statistical validation; (v) had poor reproducibility; or (vi) relied on questionable evaluation setups. The rise of deep learning—especially foundation models claiming broad generalization—further emphasizes the need for comprehensive evaluation, as their role in time-series clustering remains largely untested. To address these gaps, we evaluate 84 time-series clustering methods across 10 method classes from data mining, machine learning, and deep learning. Our analysis spans 128 time-series datasets and uses rigorous statistical methods. Within a fair comparison framework, we (i) identify the top-performing method in each class; (ii) highlight previously overlooked, high-performing classes; (iii) challenge assumptions about elastic distance measures; (iv) refute the claimed superiority of deep learning methods, including foundation models; (v) expose reproducibility issues; (vi) analyze performance variation across dataset properties; and (vii) assess scalability. Our findings reveal an illusion of progress: no method significantly outperforms the decade-old k -Shape method. Still, we highlight a deep learning-based approach with notable promise. Our results provide a strong benchmark for advancing time-series clustering, and we have open-sourced our work to support future research.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Paparrizos et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68c18f329b7b07f3a0615628https://doi.org/10.14778/3749646.3749700
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Beyond Compression: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Lossless Floating-Point Compression2025 · 10 citations
  2. 2SPARTAN: Data-Adaptive Symbolic Time-Series Approximation2025 · 11 citations
  3. 3Introduction to Time Series and Forecasting1998 · 107 citations
  4. 4Artificial Intelligence in Resource-Constrained and Shared Environments2019 · 29 citations
  5. 5Spectrum analysis—A modern perspective1981 · 3,174 citations