Sentence-embedding clustering is often interpreted from a single partition, although a reproducible solution can still be excessively coarse, cardinality-variable, or representation-dependent. We present a stability-aware audit framework that separates label-free operating-point selection from post hoc taxonomy evaluation and explicitly distinguishes the original frozen confirmatory execution from separately frozen additional robustness analyses. On a pinned Banking77 test revision (N=3076) and CLINC150+OOS (N=5500), the original anti-collapse rule selected seven-region MeanShift operating points with disjoint-random-stream confirmation ARIs of 0.9565±0.0510 and 0.9347±0.0327, respectively. Additional paired refits showed that rejected coarse candidates can remain more stable than the selected solutions, and this stability–granularity inversion persisted under ARI, AMI, NMI, V-measure, and Fowlkes–Mallows similarity. The additional audits also showed that high membership similarity can coexist with refit-cardinality variation, that representation and broader pipeline perturbations materially affect the discovered structure, and that density-based stability must be interpreted jointly with coverage and cardinality. These results support a conservative conclusion: perturbation stability is evidence of reproducibility under a stated protocol, not proof of an appropriate resolution, semantic validity, or taxonomy recovery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: