I am doing research on machine learning. Now I want to test my algorithms with some famous datasets. Since I am a newbie in this area, I can't find other suitable datasets apart from MNIST. I thing MNIST is quite suitable for our research. Does anyone know some similar datasets with MNIST?
P.S I know another handwritten digit dataset that is often used, called USPS dataset. But I need a dataset with more training examples (typically more than 10000 and comparable to the number of training examples in MNIST), so USPS is out of my selection.
The machine learning archive (http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/) contains quite a variety of datasets including those, like MINIST, suitable for classification e.g. (http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Skin+Segmentation).
I can't say which of them would be suitable without knowing what you're trying to demonstrate with your algorithm but anything inside the UCI archive is well known.
You can try Fashion MNIST or Kuzushiji MNIST that have very similar properties to MNIST, but a bit harder to predict. From Fashion MNIST's page:
Seriously, we are talking about replacing MNIST. Here are some good reasons:
MNIST is too easy. Convolutional nets can achieve 99.7% on MNIST. Classic machine learning algorithms can also achieve 97% easily. Check out our side-by-side benchmark for Fashion-MNIST vs. MNIST, and read "Most pairs of MNIST digits can be distinguished pretty well by just one pixel."
MNIST is overused. In this April 2017 Twitter thread, Google Brain research scientist and deep learning expert Ian Goodfellow calls for people to move away from MNIST.
MNIST can not represent modern CV tasks, as noted in this April 2017 Twitter thread, deep learning expert/Keras author François Chollet.
Related
I have some questions about SVM :
1- Why using SVM? or in other words, what causes it to appear?
2- The state Of art (2017)
3- What improvements have they made?
SVM works very well. In many applications, they are still among the best performing algorithms.
We've seen some progress in particular on linear SVMs, that can be trained much faster than kernel SVMs.
Read more literature. Don't expect an exhaustive answer in this QA format. Show more effort on your behalf.
SVM's are most commonly used for classification problems where labeled data is available (supervised learning) and are useful for modeling with limited data. For problems with unlabeled data (unsupervised learning), then support vector clustering is an algorithm commonly employed. SVM tends to perform better on binary classification problems since the decision boundaries will not overlap. Your 2nd and 3rd questions are very ambiguous (and need lots of work!), but I'll suffice it to say that SVM's have found wide range applicability to medical data science. Here's a link to explore more about this: Applications of Support Vector Machine (SVM) Learning in Cancer Genomics
Whenever I read articles about dataset (like MNIST and CIFAR 10), mostly I find statement like,
CIFAR-10 is standard benchmark dataset for image classification in the computer vision and machine learning literature.
If especially, I'll talk about the convolution neural network (deep learning) then, as per knowledge, the accuracy of the network architecture depends on dataset used.
I am really confused with the statement I did bold above.
What does exactly that statement mean?
Thanks in advance if someone can help me by giving real life example.
In this context, "benchmarking" has been defined on Wikipedia as:
In computing, a benchmark is the act of running a computer program, a set of programs, or other operations, in order to assess the relative performance of an object, normally by running a number of standard tests and trials against it.
In the computer vision community, some researchers focus their efforts on improving image classification performance on benchmark datasets. There are many benchmark datasets, e.g. MNIST, CIFAR-10, ImageNet. The existence of benchmark datasets means researchers can more easily compare the performance of their proposed method against existing methods. The researchers know that (generally speaking) everyone who benchmarks their method on this dataset has access to the same input data.
In some cases, a dataset provider keeps a leaderboard of the best-performing results on their benchmark dataset. For example, ImageNet keeps a record of the performance of the methods submitted to the benchmark contest each year. Here is an example of the best-performing methods for the 2017 ImageNet object classification task.
I am trying to generate a Python program that determines if a website is harmful (porn etc.).
First, I made a Python web scraping program that counts the number of occurrences for each word.
result for harmful websites
It's a key value dictionary like
{ word : [ # occurrences in harmful websites, # of websites that contain these words] }.
Now I want my program to analyze the words from any websites to check if the website is safe or not. But I don't know which methods will suit to my data.
The key thing here is your training data. You need some sort of supervised learning technique where your training data consists of website's data itself (text document) and its label (harmful or safe).
You can certainly use the RNN but there also other natural language processing techniques and much faster ones.
Typically, you should use a proper vectorizer on your training data (think of each site page as a text document), for example tf-idf (but also other possibilities; if you use Python I would strongly suggest scikit that provides lots of useful machine learning techniques and mentioned sklearn.TfidfVectorizer is already within). The point is to vectorize your text document in enhanced way. Imagine for example the English word the how many times it typically exists in text? You need to think of biases such as these.
Once your training data is vectorized you can use for example stochastic gradient descent classifier and see how it performs on your test data (in machine learning terminology the test data means to simply take some new data example and test what your ML program outputs).
In either case you will need to experiment with above options. There are many nuances and you need to test your data and see where you achieve the best results (depending on ML algorithm settings, type of vectorizer, used ML technique itself and so on). For example Support Vector Machines are great choice when it comes to binary classifiers too. You may wanna play with that too and see if it performs better than SGD.
In any case, remember that you will need to obtain quality training data with labels (harmful vs. safe) and find the best fitting classifier. On your journey to find the best one you may also wanna use cross validation to determine how well your classifier behaves. Again, already contained in scikit-learn.
N.B. Don't forget about valid cases. For example there may be a completely safe online magazine where it only mentions the harmful topic in some article; it doesn't mean the website itself is harmful though.
Edit: As I think of it, if you don't have any experience with ML at all it could be useful to take any online course because despite the knowledge of API and libraries you will still need to know what it does and the math behind the curtain (at least roughly).
What you are trying to do is called sentiment classification and is usually done with recurrent neural networks (RNNs) or Long short-term memory networks (LSTMs). This is not an easy topic to start with machine learning. If you are new you should have a look into linear/logistic regression, SVMs and basic neural networks (MLPs) first. Otherwise it will be hard to understand what is going on.
That said: there are many libraries out there for constructing neural networks. Probably easiest to use is keras. While this library simplifies a lot of things immensely, it isn't just a magic box that makes gold from trash. You need to understand what happens under the hood to get good results. Here is an example of how you can perform sentiment classification on the IMDB dataset (basically determine whether a movie review is positive or not) with keras.
For people who have no experience in NLP or ML, I recommend using TFIDF vectorizer instead of using deep learning libraries. In short, it converts sentences to vector, taking each word in vocabulary to one dimension (degree is occurrence).
Then, you can calculate cosine similarity to resulting vector.
To improve performance, use stemming / lemmatizing / stopwords supported in NLTK libraires.
I am intended to do a yes/no classifier. The problem is that the data does not come from me, so I have to work with what I have been given. I have around 150 samples, each sample contains 3 features, these features are continuous numeric variables. I know the dataset is quite small. I would like to make you two questions:
A) What would be the best machine learning algorithm for this? SVM? a neural network? All that I have read seems to require a big dataset.
B)I could make the dataset a little bit bigger by adding some samples that do not contain all the features, only one or two. I have read that you can use sparse vectors in this case, is this possible with every machine learning algorithm? (I have seen them in SVM)
Thanks a lot for your help!!!
My recommendation is to use a simple and straightforward algorithm, like decision tree or logistic regression, although, the ones you refer to should work equally well.
The dataset size shouldn't be a problem, given that you have far more samples than variables. But having more data always helps.
Naive Bayes is a good choice for a situation when there are few training examples. When compared to logistic regression, it was shown by Ng and Jordan that Naive Bayes converges towards its optimum performance faster with fewer training examples. (See section 4 of this book chapter.) Informally speaking, Naive Bayes models a joint probability distribution that performs better in this situation.
Do not use a decision tree in this situation. Decision trees have a tendency to overfit, a problem that is exacerbated when you have little training data.
Many machine learning competitions are held in Kaggle where a training set and a set of features and a test set is given whose output label is to be decided based by utilizing a training set.
It is pretty clear that here supervised learning algorithms like decision tree, SVM etc. are applicable. My question is, how should I start to approach such problems, I mean whether to start with decision tree or SVM or some other algorithm or is there is any other approach i.e. how will I decide?
So, I had never heard of Kaggle until reading your post--thank you so much, it looks awesome. Upon exploring their site, I found a portion that will guide you well. On the competitions page (click all competitions), you see Digit Recognizer and Facial Keypoints Detection, both of which are competitions, but are there for educational purposes, tutorials are provided (tutorial isn't available for the facial keypoints detection yet, as the competition is in its infancy. In addition to the general forums, competitions have forums also, which I imagine is very helpful.
If you're interesting in the mathematical foundations of machine learning, and are relatively new to it, may I suggest Bayesian Reasoning and Machine Learning. It's no cakewalk, but it's much friendlier than its counterparts, without a loss of rigor.
EDIT:
I found the tutorials page on Kaggle, which seems to be a summary of all of their tutorials. Additionally, scikit-learn, a python library, offers a ton of descriptions/explanations of machine learning algorithms.
This cheatsheet http://peekaboo-vision.blogspot.pt/2013/01/machine-learning-cheat-sheet-for-scikit.html is a good starting point. In my experience using several algorithms at the same time can often give better results, eg logistic regression and svm where the results of each one have a predefined weight. And test, test, test ;)
There is No Free Lunch in data mining. You won't know which methods work best until you try lots of them.
That being said, there is also a trade-off between understandability and accuracy in data mining. Decision Trees and KNN tend to be understandable, but less accurate than SVM or Random Forests. Kaggle looks for high accuracy over understandability.
It also depends on the number of attributes. Some learners can handle many attributes, like SVM, whereas others are slow with many attributes, like neural nets.
You can shrink the number of attributes by using PCA, which has helped in several Kaggle competitions.