I want to implement the ML on the menu in an ERP application, what i want is the menu order should change based on the user behaviour.
I have data in below format:
Sn Role Time MenuID
1 admin 1830 menu1
2. admin 1900 menu2.....
What I want is, based on current user role and time, ML should predict which MenuID to put first?
Should I treat it as supervised learning since it could be a labelled data and its regression problem because I expect the output as number(menu order)?
I read a lot of tutorials but I can't to decide where to start. I don't need any code, I just want a starting point.
I believe you could use a basic regression approach where your input features would be the user role and the time, and the target variable you would be predicting would be the menu they are most likely on at that time (You'd need to convert all this categorical data into one-hot encoded data). Also, if you apply a softmax function to the outputs, then you could get the individual probabilities for each menu and then arrange them accordingly.
Related
I am building a model that will predict the lead time of products flowing through a pipeline.
I have a lot of different features, one is a string containing a few words about the purpose of the product (often abbreviations, name of the application it will be a part of and so forth). I have previously not used this field at all when doing feature engineering.
I was thinking that it would be nice to do some type of clustering on this data, and then use the cluster ID as a feature for my model, perhaps the lead time is correlated with the type of info present in that field.
Here was my line of thinking)
1) Cleaning & tokenizing text.
2) TF-IDF
3) Clustering
But after thinking more about it, is it a bad idea? Because the clustering was based on the old data, if new words are introduced in the new data this will not be captured by the clustering algorithm, and the data should perhaps be clustered differently now. Does this mean that I would have to retrain the entire model (k-means model and then the supervised model) whenever I want to predict new data points? Are there any best practices for this?
Are there better ways of finding clusters for text data to use as features in a supervised model?
I understand the urge to use an unsupervised clustering algorithm first to see for yourself, which clusters were found. And of course you can try if such a way helps your task.
But as you have labeled data, you can pass the product description without an intermediate clustering. Your supervised algorithm shall then learn for itself if and how this feature helps in your task (of course preprocessing such as removal of stopwords, cleaining, tokenizing and feature extraction needs to be done).
Depending of your text descriptions, I could also imagine that some simple sequence embeddings could work as feature-extraction. An embedding is a vector of for example 300 dimensions, which describes the words in a manner that hp office printer and canon ink jet shall be close to each other but nice leatherbag shall be farer away from the other to phrases. For example fasText-Word-Embeddings are already trained in english. To get a single embedding for a sequence of hp office printerone can take the average-vector of the three vectors (there are more ways to get an embedding for a whole sequence, for example doc2vec).
But in the end you need to run tests to choose your features and methods!
I am working to setup data for an unsupervised learning algorithm. The goal of the project is to group (cluster) different customers together based on their behavior on the website. Obviously, some sort of clustering algorithm is best for discovering patterns in the data we can't see as humans.
However, the database contains multiple rows for each customer (in chronological order) for each action the customer took on the website for that visit. For example customer with ID# 123 clicked on page 1 at time X and that would be a row in the database, and then the same customer clicked another page at time Y. That would make another row in the database.
My question is what algorithm or approach would you use for clustering in this given scenario? K-means is really popular for this type of problem, but I don't know if it's possible to use in this situation because of the grouping. Is it somehow possible to do cluster analysis around one specific ID that includes multiple rows?
Any help/direction of unsupervised learning I should take is appreciated.
In short,
Learn a fixed-length embedding (representation) of each event;
Learn a way to combine a sequence of such embeddings into a single representation for each event, then use your favorite unsupervised methods.
For (1), you can do it either manually or use an encoder/decoder;
For (2), there is a range of things you can do, ranging from just simply averaging embeddings from each event, to training an encoder-decoder on reconstructing the original sequence of events and take the intermediate representation (that the decoder uses to reconstruct the original sequence).
A good read on this topic (though a bit old; you now also have the option of Transformer Network):
Representations for Language: From Word Embeddings to Sentence Meanings
I am trying to apply machine learning methods to predict/ analyze user's behavior. The data which I have is in the following format:
data type
I am new to the machine learning, so I am trying to understand what I am doing makes sense or not. Now in the activity column, either I have two possibilities which I am representing as 0 or 1. Now in time column, I have time in a cyclic manner mapped to the range (0-24). Now at a certain time (onehot encoded) user performs an activity. If I use activity column as a target column in machine learning, and try to predict if at a certain time user will perform one activity or another, does it make sense or not?
The reason I am trying to predict activity is that if my model provides me some result about activity prediction and in real time a user does something else (which he has not been doing over the last week or so), I want to consider it as a deviation from normal behavior.
Am I doing right or wrong? any suggestion will be appreciated. Thanks.
I think your idea is valid, but machine learning models are not 100 % accurate all the time. That is why "Accuracy" is defined for a model.
If you want to create high-performance predictive models then go for deep learning models because its performance improves over time with the increase in the size of training data sets.
I think this is a great use case for a Classification problem. Since you have only few columns (features) in your dataset, i would say start with a simple Boosted Decision Tree Classification algorithm.
Your thinking is correct, that's basically how fraud detection AI works in some cases, one option to pursue is to use the decision tree model, this may help to scale dynamically.
I was working on the same project but in a different direction, have a look maybe it can help :) https://github.com/dmi3coder/behaiv-java.
I have implemented a recommender system based upon matrix factorization techniques. I want to evaluate it.
I want to use 10-fold-cross validation with All-but-one protocol (https://ai2-s2-pdfs.s3.amazonaws.com/0fcc/45600283abca12ea2f422e3fb2575f4c7fc0.pdf).
My data set has the following structure:
user_id,item_id,rating
1,1,2
1,2,5
1,3,0
2,1,5
...
It's confusing for me to think how the data is going to be splitted, because I can't put some triples (user,item,rating) in the testing set. For example, if I select the triple (2,1,5) to the testing set and this is the only rating user 2 has made, there won't be any other information about this user and the trained model won't predict any values for him.
Considering this scenario, how should I do the splitting?
You didn't specify a language or toolset so I cannot give you a concise answer that is 100% applicable to you, but here's the approach I took to solve this same exact problem.
I'm working on a recommender system using Treasure Data (i.e. Presto) and implicit observations, and ran into a problem with my matrix where some users and items were not present. I had to re-write the algorithm to split the observations into train and test so that every user and every item would be represented in the training data. For the description of my algorithm I assume there are more users than items. If this is not true for you then just swap the two. Here's my algorithm.
Select one observation for each user
For each item that has only one observation and has not already been selected from the previous step select one observation
Merge the results of the previous two steps together.
This should produce a set of observations that covers all of the users and all of the items.
Calculate how many observations you need to fill your training set (generally 80% of the total number of observations)
Calculate how many observations are in the merged set from step 3.
The difference between steps 4 and 5 is the number of remaining observations necessary to fill the training set.
Randomly select enough of the remaining observations to fill the training set.
Merge the sets from step 3 and 6: this is your training set.
The remaining observations is your testing set.
As I mentioned, I'm doing this using Treasure Data and Presto so the only tool I have at my disposal is SQL, common table expressions, temporary tables, and Treasure Data workflow.
You're quite correct in your basic logic: if you have only one observation in a class, you must include that in the training set for the model to have any validity in that class.
However, dividing the input into these classes depends on the interactions among various observations. Can you identify classes of data, such as the "only rating" issue you mentioned? As you find other small classes, you'll also need to ensure that you have enough of those observations in your training data.
Unfortunately, this is a process that's tricky to automate. Most one-time applications simply have to hand-pick those observations from the data, and then distribute the others per normal divisions. This does have a problem that the special cases are over-represented in the training set, which can detract somewhat from the normal cases in training the model.
Do you have the capability of tuning the model as you encounter later data? This is generally the best way to handle sparse classes of input.
collaborative filtering (matrix factorization) can't have a good recommendation for an unseen user with no feedback. Nevertheless, an evaluation should consider this case and take it into account.
One thing you can do is to report performance for all test users, just test users with some feedback and just unseen users with no feedback.
So I'd say keep the test, train split random but evaluate separately for unseen users.
More info here.
I have a decision tree that is trained on the columns (Age, Sex, Time, Day, Views,Clicks) which gets classified into two classes - Yes or No - which represents buying decision for an item X.
Using these values,
I'm trying to predict the probability of 1000 samples(customers) which look like ('12','Male','9:30','Monday','10','3'),
('50','Female','10:40','Sunday','50','6')
........
I want to get the individual probability or a score which will help me recognize which customers are most likely to buy the item X. So i want to be able to sort the predictions and show a particular item to only 5 customers who will want to buy the item X.
How can I achieve this ?
Will a decision tree serve the purpose?
Is there any other method?
I'm new to ML so please forgive me for any vocabulary errors.
Using decision tree with a small sample set, you will definitely run into overfitting problem. Specially at the lower levels of the decision, where tree you will have exponentially less data to train your decision boundaries. Your data set should have a lot more samples than the number of categories, and enough samples for each categories.
Speaking of decision boundaries, make sure you understand how you are handling data type for each dimension. For example, 'sex' is a categorical data, where 'age', 'time of day', etc. are real valued inputs (discrete/continuous). So, different part of your tree will need different formulation. Otherwise, your model might end up handling 9:30, 9:31, 9:32... as separate classes.
Try some other algorithms, starting with simple ones like k-nearest neighbour (KNN). Have a validation set to test each algorithm. Use Matlab (or similar software) where you can use libraries to quickly try different methods and see which one works best. There is not enough information here to recommend you something very specific. Plus,
I suggest you try KNN too. KNN is able to capture affinity in data. Say, a product X is bought by people around age 20, during evenings, after about 5 clicks on the product page. KNN will be able to tell you how close each new customer is to the customers who bought the item. Based on this you can just pick the top 5. Very easy to implement and works great as a benchmark for more complex methods.
(Assuming views and clicks means the number of clicks and views by each customer for product X)
A decision tree is a classifier, and in general it is not suitable as a basis for a recommender system. But, given that you are only predicting the likelihood of buying one item, not tens of thousands, it kind of makes sense to use a classifier.
You simply score all of your customers and retain the 5 whose probability of buying X is highest, yes. Is there any more to the question?