I currently have a system set up where I train from old posts/categories and try to predict what category a new post will be. I am using a pipeline with TfidfVectorizer and LinearSVC to train the dataset and storing that in a pickle, then I process new posts by loading that pickle and using predict from the loaded pickle to classify the new posts. Currently, I am struggling with a few labels and I don't know why.
I am looking to provide some output on what words were triggered in the new post for each classification label so that I can see why a certain label was chosen when classifying new data against a training set, but I cannot find a way to do this.
I know that I can output the top features in my vectorizer when I am training, but how can I output essentially the reason why a certain label was chosen over another one?
During the training phase of the SVM for each word of the corpus vocabulary you learn a weight for each of the classes.
Then, during inference, you calculate the dot product between the class weights and the vector description of the instance to be classified. The algorithm returns the class that yields the highest dot product scores. Hence, you can have an estimate of how things work by examining those weights (coef_ attribute) for your instance.
I agree however that other methods like trees are more interpretable.
Related
I have a file of raw feedbacks that needs to be labeled(categorized) and then work as the training input for SVM Classifier(or any classifier for that matter).
But the catch is, I'm not assigning whole feedback to a certain category. One feedback may belong to more than one category based on the topics it talks about (noun n-grams are extracted). So, I'm labeling the topics(terms) not the feedbacks(documents). And so, I've extracted the n-grams using TFIDF while saving their features so i could train my model on. The problem with that is, using tfidf, it returns a document-term matrix that's train_x, but on the other side, I've got train_y; The labels that are assigned to each n-gram (not the whole document). So, I've ended up with a document to frequency matrix that contains x number of rows(no of documents) against a label of y number of n-grams(no of unique topics extracted).
Below is a sample of what the data look like. Blue is the n-grams(extracted by TFIDF) while the red is the labels/categories (calculated for each n-gram with a function I've manually made).
Instead of putting code, this is my strategy in implementing my concept:
The problem lies in that part where TFIDF producesx_train = tf.Transform(feedbacks), which is a document-term matrix and it doesn't make sense for it to be an input for the classifier against y_train, which is the labels for the terms and not the documents. I've tried to transpose the matrix, it gave me an error. I've tried to input 1-D array that holds only feature values for the terms directly, which also gave me an error because the classifier expects from X to be in a (sample, feature) format. I'm using Sklearn's version of SVM and TfidfVectorizer.
Simply, I want to be able to use SVM classifier on a list of terms (n-grams) against a list of labels to train the model and then test new data (after cleaning and extracting its n-grams) for SVM to predict its labels.
The solution might be a very technical thing like using another classifier that expects a different format or not using TFIDF since it's document focused (referenced) or even broader, a whole change of approach and concept (if it's wrong).
I'd very much appreciate it if someone could help.
I am new to EM algorithm, studying Hidden Markov Model.
During training my HMM by EM, I am very confused on the data setting. (text processing)
Please confirm whether my EM usage is okay or not.
At first, I calculated statistics for emission probability matrix with my whole training set. And then, I ran EM with the same set.
-> Emission probability for unseen data converged to zero at the time.
While I read a text, Speech and Language Processing, I found the exercise 8.3 tells two phase training method.
8.3 Extend the HMM tagger you built in Exercise 8.?? by adding the ability to make use of some unlabeled data in addition to your labeled training corpus. First acquire a large unlabeled corpus. Next, implement the forward-backward training algorithm. Now start with the HMM parameters you trained on the training corpus in Exercise 8.??; call this model M0. Run the forward-backward algorithm with these HMM parameters to label the unsupervised corpus. Now you have a new model M1. Test the performance of M1 on some held-out labeled data.
Following this statement, I select some instances from my training set (1/3 of training set) for getting initial statistics.
And then, I run EM procedure with whole training set for optimizing parameters in EM.
Is it ok?
The procedure that the exercise is referring to is a type of unsupervised learning known as self-training. The idea is that you use your entire labeled trainign set to build a model. Then you collect more data that is unlabeled. It is much easier to find new unlabeled data than it is to find new labeled data. After that, you would label the new data using the model you originally trained. Now, using the automatically generated labels, train a new model.
I have a question about some basic concepts of machine learning. The examples, I observed, were giving a brief overview .For training the system, feature vector is given as input. In case of supervised learning, the dataset is labelled. I have confusion about labelling. For example if I have to distinguish between two types of pictures, I will provide a feature vector and on output side for testing, I'll provide 1 for type A and 2 for type B. But if I want to extract a region of interest from a dataset of images. How will I label my data to extract ROI using SVM. I hope I am able to convey my confusion. Thanks in anticipation.
In supervised learning, such as SVMs, the dataset should be composed as follows:
<i-th feature vector><i-th label>
where i goes from 1 to the number of patterns (also examples or observations) in your training set so this represents a single record in your training set which can be used to train the SVM classifier.
So you basically have a set composed by such tuples and if you do have just 2 labels (binary classification problem) you can easily use a SVM. Indeed the SVM model will be trained thanks to the training set and the training labels and once the training phase has finished you can use another set (called Validation Set or Test Set), which is structured in the same way as the training set, to test the accuracy of your SVMs.
In other words the SVM workflow should be structured as follows:
train the SVM using the training set and the training labels
predict the labels for the validation set using the model trained in the previous step
if you know what the actual validation labels are, you can match the predicted labels with the actual labels and check how many labels have been correctly predicted. The ratio between the number of correctly predicted labels and the total number of labels in the validation set returns a scalar between [0;1] and it's called the accuracy of your SVM model.
if you're interested in the ROI, you might want to check the trained SVM parameters (mainly the weights and bias) to reconstruct the separation hyperplane
It is also important to know that the training set records should be correctly, a priori labelled: if the training labels are not correct, the SVM will never be able to correctly predict the output for previously unseen patterns. You do not have to label your data according to the ROI you want to extract, the data must be correctly labelled a priori: the SVM will have the entire set of type A pictures and the set of type B pictures and will learn the decision boundary to separate pictures of type A and pictures of type B. You do not have to trick the labels: if you do, you're not doing classification and/or machine learning and/or pattern recognition. You're basically tricking the results.
So we are running a multinomial naive bayes classification algorithm on a set of 15k tweets. We first break up each tweet into a vector of word features based on Weka's StringToWordVector function. We then save the results to a new arff file to user as our training set. We repeat this process with another set of 5k tweets and re-evaluate the test set using the same model derived from our training set.
What we would like to do is to output each sentence that weka classified in the test set along with its classification... We can see the general information (Precision, recall, f-score) of the performance and accuracy of the algorithm but we cannot see the individual sentences that were classified by weka, based on our classifier... Is there anyway to do this?
Another problem is that ultimately our professor will give us 20k more tweets and expect us to classify this new document. We are not sure how to do this however as:
All of the data we have been working with has been classified manually, both the training and test sets...
however the data we will be getting from the professor will be UNclassified... How can we
reevaluate our model on the unclassified data if Weka requires that the attribute information must
be the same as the set used to form the model and the test set we are evaluating against?
Thanks for any help!
The easiest way to acomplish these tasks is using a FilteredClassifier. This kind of classifier integrates a Filter and a Classifier, so you can connect a StringToWordVector filter with the classifier you prefer (J48, NaiveBayes, whatever), and you will be always keeping the original training set (unprocessed text), and applying the classifier to new tweets (unprocessed) by using the vocabular derived by the StringToWordVector filter.
You can see how to do this in the command line in "Command Line Functions for Text Mining in WEKA" and via a program in "A Simple Text Classifier in Java with WEKA".
I'm working on a text classification problem, and I have problems with missing values on some features.
I'm calculating class probabilities of words from labeled training data.
For example;
Let word foo belongs to class A for 100 times and belongs to class B for 200 times. In this case, i find class probability vector as [0.33,0.67] , and give it along with the word itself to classifier.
Problem is that, in the test set, there are some words that have not been seen in training data, so they have no probability vectors.
What could i do for this problem?
I ve tried giving average class probability vector of all words for missing values, but it did not improve accuracy.
Is there a way to make classifier ignore some features during evaluation just for specific instances which does not have a value for giving feature?
Regards
There is many way to achieve that
Create and train classifiers for all sub-set of feature you have. You can train your classifier on sub-set with the same data as tre training of the main classifier.
For each sample juste look at the feature it have and use the classifier that fit him the better. Don't try to do some boosting with thoses classifiers.
Just create a special class for samples that can't be classified. Or you have experimented result too poor with so little feature.
Sometimes humans too can't succefully classify samples. In many case samples that can't be classified should just be ignore. The problem is not in the classifier but in the input or can be explain by the context.
As nlp point of view, many word have a meaning/usage that is very similare in many application. So you can use stemming/lemmatization to create class of words.
You can also use syntaxic corrections, synonyms, translations (does the word come from another part of the world ?).
If this problem as enouph importance for you then you will end with a combination of the 3 previous points.