Related
I have built a model.
est1_pre = ColumnTransformer([('catONEHOT', OneHotEncoder(dtype='int',handle_unknown='ignore'),['Var1'])],remainder='drop')
est2_pre = ColumnTransformer([('BOW', TfidfVectorizer(ngram_range=(1, 3),max_features=1000),['Var2'])],remainder='drop')
m1= Pipeline([('FeaturePreprocessing', est1_pre),
('clf',alternative)])
m2= Pipeline([('FeaturePreprocessing', est2_pre),
('clf',alternative)])
model_combo = StackingClassifier(
estimators=[('cate',m1),('text',m2)],
final_estimator=RandomForestClassifier(n_estimators=10,
random_state=42)
)
I can successfully, fit and predict using m1 and m2.
However, when I look at the combination model_combo
Any attempt in calling .fit/.predict results in ValueError: Found input variables with inconsistent numbers of samples:
model_fitted=model_combo.fit(x_train,y_train)
x_train contains Var1 and Var2
How to fit model_combo?
The problem is that sklearn text preprocessors (TfidfVectorizer in this case) operate on one-dimensional data, not two-dimensional as most other preprocessors. So the vectorizer treats its input as an iterable of its columns, so there's only one "document". This can be fixed in the ColumnTransformer by specifying the column to operate on not in a list:
est2_pre = ColumnTransformer([('BOW', TfidfVectorizer(ngram_range=(1, 3),max_features=1000),'Var2')],remainder='drop')
I have a column in my data frame which contains Url information. It has 1200+ unique values. I wanted to use text mining to generate features from these values. I have used tfidfvectorizer to generate vectors and then used kmeans to identify clusters. I now want to assign these cluster labels back into my original dataframe, so that I can bin the URL information into these clusters.
Below code to generate vectors and cluster labels
from scipy.spatial.distance import cdist
vectorizer = TfidfVectorizer(min_df = 1,lowercase = False, ngram_range = (1,1), use_idf = True, stop_words='english')
X = vectorizer.fit_transform(sample\['lead_lead_source_modified'\])
X = X.toarray()
distortions=\[\]
K = range(1,10)
for k in K:
kmeanModel = KMeans(n_clusters=k).fit(X)
kmeanModel.fit(X)
distortions.append(sum(np.min(cdist(X, kmeanModel.cluster_centers_, 'euclidean'), axis=1)) / X.shape\[0\])
#append cluster labels
km = KMeans(n_clusters=4, random_state=0)
km.fit_transform(X)
cluster_labels = km.labels_
cluster_labels = pd.DataFrame(cluster_labels, columns=\['ClusterLabel_lead_lead_source'\])
cluster_labels
Through the elbow method, I decided on 4 clusters. I now have cluster labels, but I am not sure how to add them bank to dataframe on its respective index. Concatenating along axis=1 is creating Nans due to indexing issues. Below is the sample output after concatenation.
lead_lead_source_modified ClusterLabel_lead_lead_source
0 NaN 3.0
1 NaN 0.0
2 NaN 0.0
3 ['direct', 'salesline', 'website', ''] 0.0
I want to know if this approach is the right way to do, if so then how to solve this issue. If not, is there a better way to do.
Adding index value during dataframe conversion solved the issue.
But it still want to know if this is the right approach
I am working with a data-set of patient information and trying to calculate the Propensity Score from the data using MATLAB. After removing features with many missing values, I am still left with several missing (NaN) values.
I get errors due to these missing values, as the values of my cost-function and gradient vector become NaN, when I try to perform logistic regression using the following Matlab code (from Andrew Ng's Coursera Machine Learning class) :
[m, n] = size(X);
X = [ones(m, 1) X];
initial_theta = ones(n+1, 1);
[cost, grad] = costFunction(initial_theta, X, y);
options = optimset('GradObj', 'on', 'MaxIter', 400);
[theta, cost] = ...
fminunc(#(t)(costFunction(t, X, y)), initial_theta, options);
Note: sigmoid and costfunction are working functions I created for overall ease of use.
The calculations can be performed smoothly if I replace all NaN values with 1 or 0. However I am not sure if that is the best way to deal with this issue, and I was also wondering what replacement value I should pick (in general) to get the best results for performing logistic regression with missing data. Are there any benefits/drawbacks to using a particular number (0 or 1 or something else) for replacing the said missing values in my data?
Note: I have also normalized all feature values to be in the range of 0-1.
Any insight on this issue will be highly appreciated. Thank you
As pointed out earlier, this is a generic problem people deal with regardless of the programming platform. It is called "missing data imputation".
Enforcing all missing values to a particular number certainly has drawbacks. Depending on the distribution of your data it can be drastic, for example, setting all missing values to 1 in a binary sparse data having more zeroes than ones.
Fortunately, MATLAB has a function called knnimpute that estimates a missing data point by its closest neighbor.
From my experience, I often found knnimpute useful. However, it may fall short when there are too many missing sites as in your data; the neighbors of a missing site may be incomplete as well, thereby leading to inaccurate estimation. Below, I figured out a walk-around solution to that; it begins with imputing the least incomplete columns, (optionally) imposing a safe predefined distance for the neighbors. I hope this helps.
function data = dnnimpute(data,distCutoff,option,distMetric)
% data = dnnimpute(data,distCutoff,option,distMetric)
%
% Distance-based nearest neighbor imputation that impose a distance
% cutoff to determine nearest neighbors, i.e., avoids those samples
% that are more distant than the distCutoff argument.
%
% Imputes missing data coded by "NaN" starting from the covarites
% (columns) with the least number of missing data. Then it continues by
% including more (complete) covariates in the calculation of pair-wise
% distances.
%
% option,
% 'median' - Median of the nearest neighboring values
% 'weighted' - Weighted average of the nearest neighboring values
% 'default' - Unweighted average of the nearest neighboring values
%
% distMetric,
% 'euclidean' - Euclidean distance (default)
% 'seuclidean' - Standardized Euclidean distance. Each coordinate
% difference between rows in X is scaled by dividing
% by the corresponding element of the standard
% deviation S=NANSTD(X). To specify another value for
% S, use D=pdist(X,'seuclidean',S).
% 'cityblock' - City Block distance
% 'minkowski' - Minkowski distance. The default exponent is 2. To
% specify a different exponent, use
% D = pdist(X,'minkowski',P), where the exponent P is
% a scalar positive value.
% 'chebychev' - Chebychev distance (maximum coordinate difference)
% 'mahalanobis' - Mahalanobis distance, using the sample covariance
% of X as computed by NANCOV. To compute the distance
% with a different covariance, use
% D = pdist(X,'mahalanobis',C), where the matrix C
% is symmetric and positive definite.
% 'cosine' - One minus the cosine of the included angle
% between observations (treated as vectors)
% 'correlation' - One minus the sample linear correlation between
% observations (treated as sequences of values).
% 'spearman' - One minus the sample Spearman's rank correlation
% between observations (treated as sequences of values).
% 'hamming' - Hamming distance, percentage of coordinates
% that differ
% 'jaccard' - One minus the Jaccard coefficient, the
% percentage of nonzero coordinates that differ
% function - A distance function specified using #, for
% example #DISTFUN.
%
if nargin < 3
option = 'mean';
end
if nargin < 4
distMetric = 'euclidean';
end
nanVals = isnan(data);
nanValsPerCov = sum(nanVals,1);
noNansCov = nanValsPerCov == 0;
if isempty(find(noNansCov, 1))
[~,leastNans] = min(nanValsPerCov);
noNansCov(leastNans) = true;
first = data(nanVals(:,noNansCov),:);
nanRows = find(nanVals(:,noNansCov)==true); i = 1;
for row = first'
data(nanRows(i),noNansCov) = mean(row(~isnan(row)));
i = i+1;
end
end
nSamples = size(data,1);
if nargin < 2
dataNoNans = data(:,noNansCov);
distances = pdist(dataNoNans);
distCutoff = min(distances);
end
[stdCovMissDat,idxCovMissDat] = sort(nanValsPerCov,'ascend');
imputeCols = idxCovMissDat(stdCovMissDat>0);
% Impute starting from the cols (covariates) with the least number of
% missing data.
for c = reshape(imputeCols,1,length(imputeCols))
imputeRows = 1:nSamples;
imputeRows = imputeRows(nanVals(:,c));
for r = reshape(imputeRows,1,length(imputeRows))
% Calculate distances
distR = inf(nSamples,1);
%
noNansCov_r = find(isnan(data(r,:))==0);
noNansCov_r = noNansCov_r(sum(isnan(data(nanVals(:,c)'==false,~isnan(data(r,:)))),1)==0);
%
for i = find(nanVals(:,c)'==false)
distR(i) = pdist([data(r,noNansCov_r); data(i,noNansCov_r)],distMetric);
end
tmp = min(distR(distR>0));
% Impute the missing data at sample r of covariate c
switch option
case 'weighted'
data(r,c) = (1./distR(distR<=max(distCutoff,tmp)))' * data(distR<=max(distCutoff,tmp),c) / sum(1./distR(distR<=max(distCutoff,tmp)));
case 'median'
data(r,c) = median(data(distR<=max(distCutoff,tmp),c),1);
case 'mean'
data(r,c) = mean(data(distR<=max(distCutoff,tmp),c),1);
end
% The missing data in sample r is imputed. Update the sample
% indices of c which are imputed.
nanVals(r,c) = false;
end
fprintf('%u/%u of the covariates are imputed.\n',find(c==imputeCols),length(imputeCols));
end
To deal with missing data you can use one of the following three options:
If there are not many instances with missing values, you can just delete the ones with missing values.
If you have many features and it is affordable to lose some information, delete the entire feature with missing values.
The best method is to fill some value (mean, median) in place of missing value. You can calculate the mean of the rest of the training examples for that feature and fill all the missing values with the mean. This works out pretty well as the mean value stays in the distribution of your data.
Note: When you replace the missing values with the mean, calculate the mean only using training set. Also, store that value and use it to change the missing values in the test set also.
If you use 0 or 1 to replace all the missing values then the data may get skewed so it is better to replace the missing values by an average of all the other values.
I wrote a vanilla autoencoder using only Dense layer.
Below is my code:
iLayer = Input ((784,))
layer1 = Dense(128, activation='relu' ) (iLayer)
layer2 = Dense(64, activation='relu') (layer1)
layer3 = Dense(28, activation ='relu') (layer2)
layer4 = Dense(64, activation='relu') (layer3)
layer5 = Dense(128, activation='relu' ) (layer4)
layer6 = Dense(784, activation='softmax' ) (layer5)
model = Model (iLayer, layer6)
model.compile(loss='binary_crossentropy', optimizer='adam')
(trainX, trainY), (testX, testY) = mnist.load_data()
print ("shape of the trainX", trainX.shape)
trainX = trainX.reshape(trainX.shape[0], trainX.shape[1]* trainX.shape[2])
print ("shape of the trainX", trainX.shape)
model.fit (trainX, trainX, epochs=5, batch_size=100)
Questions:
1) softmax provides probability distribution. Understood. This means, I would have a vector of 784 values with probability between 0 and 1. For example [ 0.02, 0.03..... upto 784 items], summing all 784 elements provides 1.
2) I don't understand how the binary crossentropy works with these values. Binary cross entropy is for two values of output, right?
In the context of autoencoders the input and output of the model is the same. So, if the input values are in the range [0,1] then it is acceptable to use sigmoid as the activation function of last layer. Otherwise, you need to use an appropriate activation function for the last layer (e.g. linear which is the default one).
As for the loss function, it comes back to the values of input data again. If the input data are only between zeros and ones (and not the values between them), then binary_crossentropy is acceptable as the loss function. Otherwise, you need to use other loss functions such as 'mse' (i.e. mean squared error) or 'mae' (i.e. mean absolute error). Note that in the case of input values in range [0,1] you can use binary_crossentropy, as it is usually used (e.g. Keras autoencoder tutorial and this paper). However, don't expect that the loss value becomes zero since binary_crossentropy does not return zero when both prediction and label are not either zero or one (no matter they are equal or not). Here is a video from Hugo Larochelle where he explains the loss functions used in autoencoders (the part about using binary_crossentropy with inputs in range [0,1] starts at 5:30)
Concretely, in your example, you are using the MNIST dataset. So by default the values of MNIST are integers in the range [0, 255]. Usually you need to normalize them first:
trainX = trainX.astype('float32')
trainX /= 255.
Now the values would be in range [0,1]. So sigmoid can be used as the activation function and either of binary_crossentropy or mse as the loss function.
Why binary_crossentropy can be used even when the true label values (i.e. ground-truth) are in the range [0,1]?
Note that we are trying to minimize the loss function in training. So if the loss function we have used reaches its minimum value (which may not be necessarily equal to zero) when prediction is equal to true label, then it is an acceptable choice. Let's verify this is the case for binray cross-entropy which is defined as follows:
bce_loss = -y*log(p) - (1-y)*log(1-p)
where y is the true label and p is the predicted value. Let's consider y as fixed and see what value of p minimizes this function: we need to take the derivative with respect to p (I have assumed the log is the natural logarithm function for simplicity of calculations):
bce_loss_derivative = -y*(1/p) - (1-y)*(-1/(1-p)) = 0 =>
-y/p + (1-y)/(1-p) = 0 =>
-y*(1-p) + (1-y)*p = 0 =>
-y + y*p + p - y*p = 0 =>
p - y = 0 => y = p
As you can see binary cross-entropy have the minimum value when y=p, i.e. when the true label is equal to predicted label and this is exactly what we are looking for.
I have a convolutional neural network whose output is a 4-channel 2D image. I want to apply sigmoid activation function to the first two channels and then use BCECriterion to computer the loss of the produced images with the ground truth ones. I want to apply squared loss function to the last two channels and finally computer the gradients and do backprop. I would also like to multiply the cost of the squared loss for each of the two last channels by a desired scalar.
So the cost has the following form:
cost = crossEntropyCh[{1, 2}] + l1 * squaredLossCh_3 + l2 * squaredLossCh_4
The way I'm thinking about doing this is as follow:
criterion1 = nn.BCECriterion()
criterion2 = nn.MSECriterion()
error = criterion1:forward(model.output[{{}, {1, 2}}], groundTruth1) + l1 * criterion2:forward(model.output[{{}, {3}}], groundTruth2) + l2 * criterion2:forward(model.output[{{}, {4}}], groundTruth3)
However, I don't think this is the correct way of doing it since I will have to do 3 separate backprop steps, one for each of the cost terms. So I wonder, can anyone give me a better solution to do this in Torch?
SplitTable and ParallelCriterion might be helpful for your problem.
Your current output layer is followed by nn.SplitTable that splits your output channels and converts your output tensor into a table. You can also combine different functions by using ParallelCriterion so that each criterion is applied on the corresponding entry of output table.
For details, I suggest you read documentation of Torch about tables.
After comments, I added the following code segment solving the original question.
M = 100
C = 4
H = 64
W = 64
dataIn = torch.rand(M, C, H, W)
layerOfTables = nn.Sequential()
-- Because SplitTable discards the dimension it is applied on, we insert
-- an additional dimension.
layerOfTables:add(nn.Reshape(M,C,1,H,W))
-- We want to split over the second dimension (i.e. channels).
layerOfTables:add(nn.SplitTable(2, 5))
-- We use ConcatTable in order to create paths accessing to the data for
-- numereous number of criterions. Each branch from the ConcatTable will
-- have access to the data (i.e. the output table).
criterionPath = nn.ConcatTable()
-- Starting from offset 1, NarrowTable will select 2 elements. Since you
-- want to use this portion as a 2 dimensional channel, we need to combine
-- then by using JoinTable. Without JoinTable, the output will be again a
-- table with 2 elements.
criterionPath:add(nn.Sequential():add(nn.NarrowTable(1, 2)):add(nn.JoinTable(2)))
-- SelectTable is simplified version of NarrowTable, and it fetches the desired element.
criterionPath:add(nn.SelectTable(3))
criterionPath:add(nn.SelectTable(4))
layerOfTables:add(criterionPath)
-- Here goes the criterion container. You can use this as if it is a regular
-- criterion function (Please see the examples on documentation page).
criterionContainer = nn.ParallelCriterion()
criterionContainer:add(nn.BCECriterion())
criterionContainer:add(nn.MSECriterion())
criterionContainer:add(nn.MSECriterion())
Since I used almost every possible table operation, it looks a little bit nasty. However, this is the only way I could solve this problem. I hope that it helps you and others suffering from the same problem. This is how the result looks like:
dataOut = layerOfTables:forward(dataIn)
print(dataOut)
{
1 : DoubleTensor - size: 100x2x64x64
2 : DoubleTensor - size: 100x1x64x64
3 : DoubleTensor - size: 100x1x64x64
}