Clustering is difficult only when it does not matter
  Numerous papers ask how difficult it is to cluster data. We suggest that the
more relevant and interesting question is how difficult it is to cluster data
sets {\em that can be clustered well}. More generally, despite the ubiquity and
the great importance of clustering, we still do not have a satisfactory
mathematical theory of clustering. In order to properly understand clustering,
it is clearly necessary to develop a solid theoretical basis for the area. For
example, from the perspective of computational complexity theory the clustering
problem seems very hard. Numerous papers introduce various criteria and
numerical measures to quantify the quality of a given clustering. The resulting
conclusions are pessimistic, since it is computationally difficult to find an
optimal clustering of a given data set, if we go by any of these popular
criteria. In contrast, the practitioners' perspective is much more optimistic.
Our explanation for this disparity of opinions is that complexity theory
concentrates on the worst case, whereas in reality we only care for data sets
that can be clustered well.
  We introduce a theoretical framework of clustering in metric spaces that
revolves around a notion of "good clustering". We show that if a good
clustering exists, then in many cases it can be efficiently found. Our
conclusion is that contrary to popular belief, clustering should not be
considered a hard task.
