I'm a CS master student. Now I'm doing my masters thesis and the contribution of my thesis is to compare different approaches/methods of one topic (e.g. clustering of text documents). What I have done so far is look at the state of the art on the topic and read the papers. However, now I need to think of what to compare. Of course there is the obvious comparison question: which method gives the best results? But that is so obvious. My supervisor once suggested to see how those methods compare their results and see if maybe there is a better way to compare the results of the methods. It was helpful to me to think about questions like this. But still I'm so stuck and I can only think of obvious stuff. This is the first time I am doing something like that.
I'm sure some of you went through something like this, so I was wondering if you can even tell me some /basic/ stuff and questions that people address when they compare methods in computer science. My main questions to you are:
1- When I read the papers of the methods to compare, in which way I should read it? Critically? Questionable? What exactly to look for in them?
2- Is there a general scheme for comparing methods in academia?
3- As for a masters thesis, what stuff is a must-do for comparisons?
4- Any great references/papers related to comparisons that could help me?