I'm stuck with a problem statement of predicting an identifier for a product on the basis of couple of product features. A sample of data available to me looks like the one shown below:
ABC10L 20.0 34 XYZ G345F FG MKD -> 000000DEF_VYA
Here, ABC10L,20.0,34,XYZ,G345F,FG,MKD are the features and 000000DEF_VYA is the unique identifier associated with the product. Initially I tried to formulate this problem as a regression problem but I'm not sure how to generate textual output from my model and what should be my cost function. Also, I'm not sure is regression the right tool to solve the issue here.
Please help in suggesting the right approach and how I may proceed to solve this !!!
Related
I'm trying to compare J48 and MLP on a variety of datasets using WEKA. One of these is: https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/primary+tumor. I have converted this to CSV form which can be easily imported into WEKA. You can download this file here: https://ufile.io/8nj13
I used the "numeric to nominal" on the class and all the attributes to fit the natural structure of the data. However, when I ran J48 (and MLP), I got a bunch of question marks "?" in my output, presumably due to not having enough observations/instances of the appropriate type.
How can I get around this? I'm sure there must be a filter for this kind of thing. I've attached a picture below.
The detailed accuracy table is displaying a question mark since no instance was actually classified as that specific class. This for example means that since no instance was classified as class 16, WEKA can not provide you with details regarding said class 16 classifications. This image might help you understand.
In regards to the amount of instances of the appropriate class, you can use the ClassBalancer filter under, found at weka/filters/supervised/instance/ClassBalancer. This should help balance out the amount of the various classes.
Also note that your dataset contains some missing values, this could be solved by either discarding the instances with missing data or running the ReplaceMissingValues filter, found at weka/filters/unsupervised/attribute/ReplaceMissingValues.
Is there a way to generate a one-sentence summarization of Q&A pairs?
For example, provided:
Q: What is the color of the car?
A: Red
I want to generate a summary as
The color of the car is red
Or, given
Q: Are you a man?
A: Yes
to
Yes, I am a man.
which accounts for both question and answer.
What would be some of the most reasonable ways to do this?
I had to once work on solving the opposite problem, i.e. generating questions out of sentences from Wikipedia articles.
I used the Stanford Parser to generate parse trees out of all possible sentences in my training dataset.
e.g.
Go to http://nlp.stanford.edu:8080/parser/index.jsp
Enter "The color of the car is red." and click "Parse".
Then look at the Parse section of the response. The first layer of that sentence is NP VP (noun phrase followed by a verb phrase).
The second layer is NP PP VBZ ADJP.
I basically collected these patterns across 1000s of sentences, sorted them how common each patter was, and then used figured out how to best modify this parse tree to convert into each sentence in a different Wh-question (What, Who, When, Where, Why, etc)
You could you easily do something very similar. Study the parse trees of all of your training data, and figure out what patterns you could extract to get your work done. In many cases, just replacing the Wh word from the question with the answer would give you a valid albeit somewhat awkwardly phrases sentence.
e.g. "Red is the color of the car."
In the case of questions like "Are you a man?" (i.e. primary verb is something like 'are', 'can', 'should', etc), swapping the first 2 words usually does the trick - "You are a man?"
I don't know any NLP task that explicitly handles your requirement.
Broadly, there are two kinds of questions. Questions that expect a passage as the answer such as definition or explain sort: What is Ebola Fever. The second type are fill in the blank which are referred to as Factoid Questions in the literature such as What is the height of Mt. Everest?. It is not clear what kind of question you would like to summarize. I am assuming you are interested in factoid questions as your examples refer to only them.
A very similar problem arises in the task of Question Answering. One of the first stages of this task is to generate query. In the paper: An Exploration of the Principles Underlying
Redundancy-Based Factoid Question
Answering; Jimmy Lin 2007, the author claims that better performance can be achieved by reformulating the query (see section 4.1) to the form more likely to appear in free text. Let me copy some of the examples discussed in the paper.
1. What year did Alaska became a state?
2. Alaska became a state ?x
1. Who was the first person to run the miles in less than four minutes?
2. The first person to run the miles in less than four minutes was ?x
In the above examples, the query in 1 is reformulated to 2. As you might have already observed, ?x is the blank that should be filled by the answer. This reformulation is carried out through a dozen hand-written rules and are built into the software tool discussed in the paper: ARANEA. All you have to do is to find the tool and use it, the paper is a good ten years old, I cannot promise you anything though :)
Hope this helps.
I am trying to generate a PMML from a random forest model I obtained using R. I am using the randomForest package 4.6-12 and the last version of PMML for R. But every time I try to generate the PMML obtain an error. Here is the code:
data_train.rf <- randomForest( TARGET ~ ., data = train, ntree=100, na.action=na.omit, importance=TRUE)
pmml_file = pmml(data_train.rf)
[1] "Now converting tree 1 to PMML"
Error in append.XMLNode(rfNode, splitNode) : object 'splitNode' not found
I haven't been able to find the origin of the problem, any thoughts?
Thanks in advance,
Alvaro
Looks like the variable splitNode has not been initialized inside the "pmml" package. The initialization pathway depends on the data type of the split variable (eg. numeric, logical, factor). Please see the source code of the /R/pmml.randomForest.R file inside "pmml" package.
So, what are the columns in your train data.frame object?
Alternatively, you could try out the r2pmml package as it is much better at handling the randomForest model type.
The pmml code assumes the data type of the variables are numeric, simple logical or factor. It wont work if the data you use are some other type; DateTime for example.
It would help if your problem is reproducible; ideally you would provide the dataset you used. If not, at least a sample of it or a description of it...maybe summarize it.
You should also consider emailing the package maintainers directly.
I may have found the origin for this problem. In my dataset I have approx 500000 events and 30 variables, 10 of these variables are factors, and some of them have weakly populated levels in some cases having as little as 1 event.
I built several Random Forest models, each time including and extra variable to the model. I started adding to the model the numerical variables without a problem to generate a PMML, the same happened for the categorical variables with all levels largely populated, when I tried to include categorical variables with levels weakly populated I got the error:
Error in append.XMLNode(rfNode, splitNode) : object 'splitNode' not found
I suppose that the origin of the problem is that in some situations when building a tree where the levels is weakly populated then there is no split as there is only one case and although the randomForest package knows how to handle these cases, the pmml package does not.
My tests show that this problem appears when the number of levels of a categorical variable goes beyond the maximum number allowed by the randomForest function. The split defined in the forest sublist is no longer a positive integer which is required by the split definition for categorical objects. Reducing the number of levels fixed the problem.
Recently i am working on machine learning and build some Models for classification problem with the help of some tutorials. Though i solved my problem successfully but cant get the use and inference of using "NumerictoNominal" method please explain me.
I have tried to learn from the available text but it is very hard core i am seeking for simple explanation.
thanks and regards
I search a lot and finally got a simple example "A set of data is said to be nominal if the values / observations belonging to it can be assigned a code in the form of a number where the numbers are simply labels" for example PIN CODE of a City. Although we use Numeric value to build codes and also u can apply simple Algebra on PIN Codes but it won't make any sense. Also attribute SEX could be male or female it is also a kind of nominal attribute.
thanks
I am experimenting with machine learning in general, and Bayesian analysis in particular, by writing a tool to help me identify my collection of e-books. The input data consist of a set of e-book files, whose names and in some cases contents contain hints as to the book they correspond to.
Some are obvious to the human reader, like:
Artificial Intelligence - A Modern Approach 3rd.pdf
Microsoft Press - SharePoint Foundation 2010 Inside Out.pdf
The Complete Guide to PC Repair 5th Ed [2011].pdf
Hamlet.txt
Others are not so obvious:
Vsphere5.prc (Actually 'Mastering VSphere 5' by Scott Lowe)
as.ar.pdf (Actually 'Atlas Shrugged' by Ayn Rand)
Rather than try to code various parsers for different formats of file names, I thought I would build a few dozen simple rules, each with a score.
For example, one rule would look in the first few pages of the file for something resembling an ISBN number, and if found would propose a hypothesis that the file corresponds to the book identified by that ISBN number.
Another rule would look to see if the file name is in 'Author - Title' format and, if so, would propose a hypothesis that the author is 'Author' and the title is 'Title'. Similar rules for other formats.
I thought I could also get a list of book titles and authors from Amazon or an ISBN database, and search the file name and first few pages of the file for any of these; any matches found would result in a hypothesis being suggested by that rule.
In the end I would have a set of tuples like this:
[rulename,hypothesis]
I expect that some rules, such as the ISBN match, will have a high probability of being correct, when they are available. Other rules, like matches based on known book titles and authors, would be more common but not as accurate.
My questions are:
Is this a good approach for solving this problem?
If so, is Bayesian analysis a good candidate for combining all of these rules' hypotheses into compound score to help determine which hypothesis is the strongest, or most likely?
Is there a better way to solve this problem, or some research paper or book which you can suggest I turn to for more information?
It depends on the size of your collection and the time you want to spend training the classifier. It will be difficult to get good generalization that will save you time. For any type of classifier you will have to create a large training set, and also find a lot of rules before you get good accuracy. It will probably be more efficient (less false positives) to create the rules and use them only to suggest title alternatives for you to choose from, and not to implement the classifier. But, if the purpose is learning, then go ahead.