# Deep Learning from first principles in Python, R and Octave – Part 3

“Once upon a time, I, Chuang Tzu, dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of following my fancies as a butterfly, and was unconscious of my individuality as a man. Suddenly, I awoke, and there I lay, myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly dreaming that I am a man.”
from The Brain: The Story of you – David Eagleman

“Thought is a great big vector of neural activity”
Prof Geoffrey Hinton

# Introduction

This is the third part in my series on Deep Learning from first principles in Python, R and Octave. In the first part Deep Learning from first principles in Python, R and Octave-Part 1, I implemented logistic regression as a 2 layer neural network. The 2nd part Deep Learning from first principles in Python, R and Octave-Part 2, dealt with the implementation of 3 layer Neural Networks with 1 hidden layer to perform classification tasks, where the 2 classes cannot be separated by a linear boundary. In this third part, I implement a multi-layer, Deep Learning (DL) network of arbitrary depth (any number of hidden layers) and arbitrary height (any number of activation units in each hidden layer). The implementations of these Deep Learning networks, in all the 3 parts, are based on vectorized versions in Python, R and Octave. The implementation in the 3rd part is for a L-layer Deep Netwwork, but without any regularization, early stopping, momentum or learning rate adaptation techniques. However even the barebones multi-layer DL, is a handful and has enough hyperparameters to fine-tune and adjust.

The implementation of the vectorized L-layer Deep Learning network in Python, R and Octave were both exhausting, and exacting!! Keeping track of the indices, layer number and matrix dimensions required quite bit of focus. While the implementation was demanding, it was also very exciting to get the code to work. The trick was to be able to shift gears between the slight quirkiness between the languages. Here are some of challenges I faced

1. Python and Octave allow multiple return values to be unpacked in a single statement. With R, unpacking multiple return values from a list, requires the list returned, to be unpacked separately. I did see that there is a package gsubfn, which does this.  I hope this feature becomes a base R feature.
2. Python and R allow dissimilar elements to be saved and returned from functions using dictionaries or lists respectively. However there is no real equivalent in Octave. The closest I got to this functionality in Octave, was the ‘cell array’. But the cell array can be accessed only by the index, and not with the key as in a Python dictionary or R list. This makes things just a bit more difficult in Octave.
3. Python and Octave include implicit broadcasting. In R, broadcasting is not implicit, but R has a nifty function, the sweep(), with which we can broadcast either by columns or by rows
4. The closest equivalent of Python’s dictionary, or R’s list, in Octave is the cell array. However I had to manage separate cell arrays for weights and biases and during gradient descent and separate gradients dW and dB
5. In Python the rank-1 numpy arrays can be annoying at times. This issue is not present in R and Octave.

Though the number of lines of code for Deep Learning functions in Python, R and Octave are about ~350 apiece, they have been some of the most difficult code I have implemented. The current vectorized implementation supports the relu, sigmoid and tanh activation functions as of now. I will be adding other activation functions like the ‘leaky relu’, ‘softmax’ and others, to the implementation in the weeks to come.

While testing with different hyper-parameters namely i) the number of hidden layers, ii) the number of activation units in each layer, iii) the activation function and iv) the number iterations, I found the L-layer Deep Learning Network to be very sensitive to these hyper-parameters. It is not easy to tune the parameters. Adding more hidden layers, or more units per layer, does not help and mostly results in gradient descent getting stuck in some local minima. It does take a fair amount of trial and error and very close observation on how the DL network performs for logical changes. We then can zero in on the most the optimal solution. Feel free to download/fork my code from Github DeepLearning-Part 3 and play around with the hyper-parameters for your own problems.

#### Derivation of a Multi Layer Deep Learning Network

Lets take a simple 3 layer Neural network with 3 hidden layers and an output layer

In the forward propagation cycle the equations are

$Z_{1} = W_{1}A_{0} +b_{1}$  and  $A_{1} = g(Z_{1})$
$Z_{2} = W_{2}A_{1} +b_{2}$  and  $A_{2} = g(Z_{2})$
$Z_{3} = W_{3}A_{2} +b_{3}$  and $A_{3} = g(Z_{3})$

The loss function is given by
$L = -(ylogA3 + (1-y)log(1-A3))$
and $dL/dA3 = -(Y/A_{3} + (1-Y)/(1-A_{3}))$

For a binary classification the output activation function is the sigmoid function given by
$A_{3} = 1/(1+ e^{-Z3})$. It can be shown that
$dA_{3}/dZ_{3} = A_{3}(1-A_3)$ see equation 2 in Part 1

$\partial L/\partial Z_{3} = \partial L/\partial A_{3}* \partial A_{3}/\partial Z_{3} = A3-Y$ see equation (f) in  Part 1
and since
$\partial L/\partial A_{2} = \partial L/\partial Z_{3} * \partial Z_{3}/\partial A_{2} = (A_{3} -Y) * W_{3}$ because $\partial Z_{3}/\partial A_{2} = W_{3}$ -(1a)
and $\partial L/\partial Z_{2} =\partial L/\partial A_{2} * \partial A_{2}/\partial Z_{2} = (A_{3} -Y) * W_{3} *g'(Z_{2})$ -(1b)
$\partial L/\partial W_{2} = \partial L/\partial Z_{2} * A_{1}$ -(1c)
since $\partial Z_{2}/\partial W_{2} = A_{1}$
and
$\partial L/\partial b_{2} = \partial L/\partial Z_{2}$ -(1d)
because
$\partial Z_{2}/\partial b_{2} =1$

Also

$\partial L/\partial A_{1} =\partial L/\partial Z_{2} * \partial Z_{2}/\partial A_{1} = \partial L/\partial Z_{2} * W_{2}$     – (2a)
$\partial L/\partial Z_{1} =\partial L/\partial A_{1} * \partial A_{1}/\partial Z_{1} = \partial L/\partial A_{1} * W_{3} *g'(Z_{2})$ – (2b)
$\partial L/\partial W_{1} = \partial L/\partial Z_{1} * A_{0}$ – (2c)
$\partial L/\partial b_{1} = \partial L/\partial Z_{1}$ – (2d)

Inspecting the above equations (1a – 1d & 2a-2d), our ‘Uber deep, bottomless’ brain  can easily discern the pattern in these equations. The equation for any layer ‘l’ is of the form
$Z_{l} = W_{l}A_{l-1} +b_{l}$     and  $A_{l} = g(Z_{l})$
The equation for the backward propagation have the general form
$\partial L/\partial A_{l} = \partial L/\partial Z_{l+1} * W^{l+1}$
$\partial L/\partial Z_{l}=\partial L/\partial A_{l} *g'(Z_{l})$
$\partial L/\partial W_{l} =\partial L/\partial Z_{l} *A^{l-1}$
$\partial L/\partial b_{l} =\partial L/\partial Z_{l}$

Some other important results The derivatives of the activation functions in the implemented Deep Learning network
g(z) = sigmoid(z) = $1/(1+e^{-z})$ = a g’(z) = a(1-a) – See Part 1
g(z) = tanh(z) = a g’(z) = $1 - a^{2}$
g(z) = relu(z) = z  when z>0 and 0 when z 0 and 0 when z <= 0
While it appears that there is a discontinuity for the derivative at 0 the small value at the discontinuity does not present a problem

The implementation of the multi layer vectorized Deep Learning Network for Python, R and Octave is included below. For all these implementations, initially I create the size and configuration of the the Deep Learning network with the layer dimennsions So for example layersDimension Vector ‘V’ of length L indicating ‘L’ layers where

V (in Python)= $[v_{0}, v_{1}, v_{2}$, … $v_{L-1}]$
V (in R)= $c(v_{1}, v_{2}, v_{3}$ , … $v_{L})$
V (in Octave)= [ $v_{1} v_{2} v_{3}$$v_{L}]$

In all of these implementations the first element is the number of input features to the Deep Learning network and the last element is always a ‘sigmoid’ activation function since all the problems deal with binary classification.

The number of elements between the first and the last element are the number of hidden layers and the magnitude of each $v_{i}$ is the number of activation units in each hidden layer, which is specified while actually executing the Deep Learning network using the function L_Layer_DeepModel(), in all the implementations Python, R and Octave

## 1a. Classification with Multi layer Deep Learning Network – Relu activation(Python)

In the code below a 4 layer Neural Network is trained to generate a non-linear boundary between the classes. In the code below the ‘Relu’ Activation function is used. The number of activation units in each layer is 9. The cost vs iterations is plotted in addition to the decision boundary. Further the accuracy, precision, recall and F1 score are also computed

import os
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import matplotlib.colors
import sklearn.linear_model

from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs
from matplotlib.colors import ListedColormap
import sklearn
import sklearn.datasets

#from DLfunctions import plot_decision_boundary
execfile("./DLfunctions34.py") #
os.chdir("C:\\software\\DeepLearning-Posts\\part3")

# Create clusters of 2 classes
X1, Y1 = make_blobs(n_samples = 400, n_features = 2, centers = 9,
cluster_std = 1.3, random_state = 4)
#Create 2 classes
Y1=Y1.reshape(400,1)
Y1 = Y1 % 2
X2=X1.T
Y2=Y1.T
# Set the dimensions of DL Network
#  Below we have
#  2 - 2 input features
#  9,9 - 2 hidden layers with 9 activation units per layer and
#  1 - 1 sigmoid activation unit in the output layer as this is a binary classification
# The activation in the hidden layer is the 'relu' specified in L_Layer_DeepModel

layersDimensions = [2, 9, 9,1] #  4-layer model
parameters = L_Layer_DeepModel(X2, Y2, layersDimensions,hiddenActivationFunc='relu', learning_rate = 0.3,num_iterations = 2500, fig="fig1.png")
#Plot the decision boundary
plot_decision_boundary(lambda x: predict(parameters, x.T), X2,Y2,str(0.3),"fig2.png")

# Compute the confusion matrix
yhat = predict(parameters,X2)
from sklearn.metrics import confusion_matrix
a=confusion_matrix(Y2.T,yhat.T)
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score, precision_score, recall_score, f1_score
print('Accuracy: {:.2f}'.format(accuracy_score(Y2.T, yhat.T)))
print('Precision: {:.2f}'.format(precision_score(Y2.T, yhat.T)))
print('Recall: {:.2f}'.format(recall_score(Y2.T, yhat.T)))
print('F1: {:.2f}'.format(f1_score(Y2.T, yhat.T)))
## Accuracy: 0.90
## Precision: 0.91
## Recall: 0.87
## F1: 0.89

For more details on metrics like Accuracy, Recall, Precision etc. used in classification take a look at my post Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 2. More details about these and other metrics besides implementation of the most common machine learning algorithms are available in my book My book ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python’ on Amazon

## 1b. Classification with Multi layer Deep Learning Network – Relu activation(R)

In the code below, binary classification is performed on the same data set as above using the Relu activation function. The DL network is same as above

library(ggplot2)
x <- z[,1:2]
y <- z[,3]
X1 <- t(x)
Y1 <- t(y)

# Set the dimensions of the Deep Learning network
# No of input features =2, 2 hidden layers with 9 activation units and 1 output layer
layersDimensions = c(2, 9, 9,1)
# Execute the Deep Learning Neural Network
retvals = L_Layer_DeepModel(X1, Y1, layersDimensions,
hiddenActivationFunc='relu',
learningRate = 0.3,
numIterations = 5000,
print_cost = True)
library(ggplot2)
source("DLfunctions33.R")
# Get the computed costs
costs <- retvals[['costs']]
# Create a sequence of iterations
numIterations=5000
iterations <- seq(0,numIterations,by=1000)
df <-data.frame(iterations,costs)
# Plot the Costs vs number of iterations
ggplot(df,aes(x=iterations,y=costs)) + geom_point() +geom_line(color="blue") +
xlab('No of iterations') + ylab('Cost') + ggtitle("Cost vs No of iterations")

# Plot the decision boundary
plotDecisionBoundary(z,retvals,hiddenActivationFunc="relu",0.3)

library(caret)
# Predict the output for the data values
yhat <-predict(retvals$parameters,X1,hiddenActivationFunc="relu") yhat[yhat==FALSE]=0 yhat[yhat==TRUE]=1 # Compute the confusion matrix confusionMatrix(yhat,Y1) ## Confusion Matrix and Statistics ## ## Reference ## Prediction 0 1 ## 0 201 10 ## 1 21 168 ## ## Accuracy : 0.9225 ## 95% CI : (0.8918, 0.9467) ## No Information Rate : 0.555 ## P-Value [Acc > NIR] : < 2e-16 ## ## Kappa : 0.8441 ## Mcnemar's Test P-Value : 0.07249 ## ## Sensitivity : 0.9054 ## Specificity : 0.9438 ## Pos Pred Value : 0.9526 ## Neg Pred Value : 0.8889 ## Prevalence : 0.5550 ## Detection Rate : 0.5025 ## Detection Prevalence : 0.5275 ## Balanced Accuracy : 0.9246 ## ## 'Positive' Class : 0 ##  ## 1c. Classification with Multi layer Deep Learning Network – Relu activation(Octave) Included below is the code for performing classification. Incidentally Octave does not seem to have implemented the confusion matrix, but confusionmat is available in Matlab. # Read the data data=csvread("data.csv"); X=data(:,1:2); Y=data(:,3); # Set layer dimensions layersDimensions = [2 9 7 1] #tanh=-0.5(ok), #relu=0.1 best! # Execute Deep Network [weights biases costs]=L_Layer_DeepModel(X', Y', layersDimensions, hiddenActivationFunc='relu', learningRate = 0.1, numIterations = 10000); plotCostVsIterations(10000,costs); plotDecisionBoundary(data,weights, biases,hiddenActivationFunc="tanh")  ## 2a. Classification with Multi layer Deep Learning Network – Tanh activation(Python) Below the Tanh activation function is used to perform the same classification. I found the Tanh activation required a simpler Neural Network of 3 layers. # Tanh activation import os import numpy as np import matplotlib.pyplot as plt import matplotlib.colors import sklearn.linear_model from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs from matplotlib.colors import ListedColormap import sklearn import sklearn.datasets #from DLfunctions import plot_decision_boundary os.chdir("C:\\software\\DeepLearning-Posts\\part3") execfile("./DLfunctions34.py") # Create the dataset X1, Y1 = make_blobs(n_samples = 400, n_features = 2, centers = 9, cluster_std = 1.3, random_state = 4) #Create 2 classes Y1=Y1.reshape(400,1) Y1 = Y1 % 2 X2=X1.T Y2=Y1.T # Set the dimensions of the Neural Network layersDimensions = [2, 4, 1] # 3-layer model # Compute the DL network parameters = L_Layer_DeepModel(X2, Y2, layersDimensions, hiddenActivationFunc='tanh', learning_rate = .5,num_iterations = 2500,fig="fig3.png") #Plot the decision boundary plot_decision_boundary(lambda x: predict(parameters, x.T), X2,Y2,str(0.5),"fig4.png")  ## 2b. Classification with Multi layer Deep Learning Network – Tanh activation(R) R performs better with a Tanh activation than the Relu as can be seen below  #Set the dimensions of the Neural Network layersDimensions = c(2, 9, 9,1) library(ggplot2) # Read the data z <- as.matrix(read.csv("data.csv",header=FALSE)) x <- z[,1:2] y <- z[,3] X1 <- t(x) Y1 <- t(y) # Execute the Deep Model retvals = L_Layer_DeepModel(X1, Y1, layersDimensions, hiddenActivationFunc='tanh', learningRate = 0.3, numIterations = 5000, print_cost = True) # Get the costs costs <- retvals[['costs']] iterations <- seq(0,numIterations,by=1000) df <-data.frame(iterations,costs) # Plot Cost vs number of iterations ggplot(df,aes(x=iterations,y=costs)) + geom_point() +geom_line(color="blue") + xlab('No of iterations') + ylab('Cost') + ggtitle("Cost vs No of iterations") #Plot the decision boundary plotDecisionBoundary(z,retvals,hiddenActivationFunc="tanh",0.3) ## 2c. Classification with Multi layer Deep Learning Network – Tanh activation(Octave) The code below uses the Tanh activation in the hidden layers for Octave # Read the data data=csvread("data.csv"); X=data(:,1:2); Y=data(:,3); # Set layer dimensions layersDimensions = [2 9 7 1] #tanh=-0.5(ok), #relu=0.1 best! # Execute Deep Network [weights biases costs]=L_Layer_DeepModel(X', Y', layersDimensions, hiddenActivationFunc='tanh', learningRate = 0.1, numIterations = 10000); plotCostVsIterations(10000,costs); plotDecisionBoundary(data,weights, biases,hiddenActivationFunc="tanh")  ## 3. Bernoulli’s Lemniscate To make things more interesting, I create a 2D figure of the Bernoulli’s lemniscate to perform non-linear classification. The Lemniscate is given by the equation $(x^{2} + y^{2})^{2}$ = $2a^{2}*(x^{2}-y^{2})$ ## 3a. Classifying a lemniscate with Deep Learning Network – Relu activation(Python) import os import numpy as np import matplotlib.pyplot as plt os.chdir("C:\\software\\DeepLearning-Posts\\part3") execfile("./DLfunctions33.py") x1=np.random.uniform(0,10,2000).reshape(2000,1) x2=np.random.uniform(0,10,2000).reshape(2000,1) X=np.append(x1,x2,axis=1) X.shape # Create a subset of values where squared is <0,4. Perform ravel() to flatten this vector # Create the equation # (x^{2} + y^{2})^2 - 2a^2*(x^{2}-y^{2}) <= 0 a=np.power(np.power(X[:,0]-5,2) + np.power(X[:,1]-5,2),2) b=np.power(X[:,0]-5,2) - np.power(X[:,1]-5,2) c= a - (b*np.power(4,2)) <=0 Y=c.reshape(2000,1) # Create a scatter plot of the lemniscate plt.scatter(X[:,0], X[:,1], c=Y, marker= 'o', s=15,cmap="viridis") Z=np.append(X,Y,axis=1) plt.savefig("fig50.png",bbox_inches='tight') plt.clf() # Set the data for classification X2=X.T Y2=Y.T # These settings work the best # Set the Deep Learning layer dimensions for a Relu activation layersDimensions = [2,7,4,1] #Execute the DL network parameters = L_Layer_DeepModel(X2, Y2, layersDimensions, hiddenActivationFunc='relu', learning_rate = 0.5,num_iterations = 10000, fig="fig5.png") #Plot the decision boundary plot_decision_boundary(lambda x: predict(parameters, x.T), X2, Y2,str(2.2),"fig6.png") # Compute the Confusion matrix yhat = predict(parameters,X2) from sklearn.metrics import confusion_matrix a=confusion_matrix(Y2.T,yhat.T) from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score, precision_score, recall_score, f1_score print('Accuracy: {:.2f}'.format(accuracy_score(Y2.T, yhat.T))) print('Precision: {:.2f}'.format(precision_score(Y2.T, yhat.T))) print('Recall: {:.2f}'.format(recall_score(Y2.T, yhat.T))) print('F1: {:.2f}'.format(f1_score(Y2.T, yhat.T))) ## Accuracy: 0.93 ## Precision: 0.77 ## Recall: 0.76 ## F1: 0.76 We could get better performance by tuning further. Do play around if you fork the code. Note:: The lemniscate data is saved as a CSV and then read in R and also in Octave. I do this instead of recreating the lemniscate shape ## 3b. Classifying a lemniscate with Deep Learning Network – Relu activation(R code) The R decision boundary for the Bernoulli’s lemniscate is shown below Z <- as.matrix(read.csv("lemniscate.csv",header=FALSE)) Z1=data.frame(Z) # Create a scatter plot of the lemniscate ggplot(Z1,aes(x=V1,y=V2,col=V3)) +geom_point() #Set the data for the DL network X=Z[,1:2] Y=Z[,3] X1=t(X) Y1=t(Y) # Set the layer dimensions for the tanh activation function layersDimensions = c(2,5,4,1) # Execute the Deep Learning network with Tanh activation retvals = L_Layer_DeepModel(X1, Y1, layersDimensions, hiddenActivationFunc='tanh', learningRate = 0.3, numIterations = 20000, print_cost = True) # Plot cost vs iteration costs <- retvals[['costs']] numIterations = 20000 iterations <- seq(0,numIterations,by=1000) df <-data.frame(iterations,costs) ggplot(df,aes(x=iterations,y=costs)) + geom_point() +geom_line(color="blue") + xlab('No of iterations') + ylab('Cost') + ggtitle("Cost vs No of iterations") #Plot the decision boundary plotDecisionBoundary(Z,retvals,hiddenActivationFunc="tanh",0.3) ## 3c. Classifying a lemniscate with Deep Learning Network – Relu activation(Octave code) Octave is used to generate the non-linear lemniscate boundary.  # Read the data data=csvread("lemniscate.csv"); X=data(:,1:2); Y=data(:,3); # Set the dimensions of the layers layersDimensions = [2 9 7 1] # Compute the DL network [weights biases costs]=L_Layer_DeepModel(X', Y', layersDimensions, hiddenActivationFunc='relu', learningRate = 0.20, numIterations = 10000); plotCostVsIterations(10000,costs); plotDecisionBoundary(data,weights, biases,hiddenActivationFunc="relu")  ## 4a. Binary Classification using MNIST – Python code Finally I perform a simple classification using the MNIST handwritten digits, which according to Prof Geoffrey Hinton is “the Drosophila of Deep Learning”. The Python code for reading the MNIST data is taken from Alex Kesling’s github link MNIST. In the Python code below, I perform a simple binary classification between the handwritten digit ‘5’ and ‘not 5’ which is all other digits. I will perform the proper classification of all digits using the Softmax classifier some time later. import os import numpy as np import matplotlib.pyplot as plt os.chdir("C:\\software\\DeepLearning-Posts\\part3") execfile("./DLfunctions34.py") execfile("./load_mnist.py") training=list(read(dataset='training',path="./mnist")) test=list(read(dataset='testing',path="./mnist")) lbls=[] pxls=[] print(len(training)) # Select the first 10000 training data and the labels for i in range(10000): l,p=training[i] lbls.append(l) pxls.append(p) labels= np.array(lbls) pixels=np.array(pxls) # Sey y=1 when labels == 5 and 0 otherwise y=(labels==5).reshape(-1,1) X=pixels.reshape(pixels.shape[0],-1) # Create the necessary feature and target variable X1=X.T Y1=y.T # Create the layer dimensions. The number of features are 28 x 28 = 784 since the 28 x 28 # pixels is flattened to single vector of length 784. layersDimensions=[784, 15,9,7,1] # Works very well parameters = L_Layer_DeepModel(X1, Y1, layersDimensions, hiddenActivationFunc='relu', learning_rate = 0.1,num_iterations = 1000, fig="fig7.png") # Test data lbls1=[] pxls1=[] for i in range(800): l,p=test[i] lbls1.append(l) pxls1.append(p) testLabels=np.array(lbls1) testData=np.array(pxls1) ytest=(testLabels==5).reshape(-1,1) Xtest=testData.reshape(testData.shape[0],-1) Xtest1=Xtest.T Ytest1=ytest.T yhat = predict(parameters,Xtest1) from sklearn.metrics import confusion_matrix a=confusion_matrix(Ytest1.T,yhat.T) from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score, precision_score, recall_score, f1_score print('Accuracy: {:.2f}'.format(accuracy_score(Ytest1.T, yhat.T))) print('Precision: {:.2f}'.format(precision_score(Ytest1.T, yhat.T))) print('Recall: {:.2f}'.format(recall_score(Ytest1.T, yhat.T))) print('F1: {:.2f}'.format(f1_score(Ytest1.T, yhat.T))) probs=predict_proba(parameters,Xtest1) from sklearn.metrics import precision_recall_curve precision, recall, thresholds = precision_recall_curve(Ytest1.T, probs.T) closest_zero = np.argmin(np.abs(thresholds)) closest_zero_p = precision[closest_zero] closest_zero_r = recall[closest_zero] plt.xlim([0.0, 1.01]) plt.ylim([0.0, 1.01]) plt.plot(precision, recall, label='Precision-Recall Curve') plt.plot(closest_zero_p, closest_zero_r, 'o', markersize = 12, fillstyle = 'none', c='r', mew=3) plt.xlabel('Precision', fontsize=16) plt.ylabel('Recall', fontsize=16) plt.savefig("fig8.png",bbox_inches='tight')   ## Accuracy: 0.99 ## Precision: 0.96 ## Recall: 0.89 ## F1: 0.92 In addition to plotting the Cost vs Iterations, I also plot the Precision-Recall curve to show how the Precision and Recall, which are complementary to each other vary with respect to the other. To know more about Precision-Recall, please check my post Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 4. You could also check out my book My book ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python’ on Amazon for details on the key metrics and algorithms for classification and regression problems. A physical copy of the book is much better than scrolling down a webpage. Personally, I tend to use my own book quite frequently to refer to R, Python constructs, subsetting, machine Learning function calls and the necessary parameters etc. It is useless to commit any of this to memory, and a physical copy of a book is much easier to thumb through for the relevant code snippet. Pick up your copy today! ## 4b. Binary Classification using MNIST – R code In the R code below the same binary classification of the digit ‘5’ and the ‘not 5’ is performed. The code to read and display the MNIST data is taken from Brendan O’ Connor’s github link at MNIST source("mnist.R") load_mnist() #show_digit(train$x[2,]
layersDimensions=c(784, 7,7,3,1) # Works at 1500
x <- t(train$x) # Choose only 5000 training data x2 <- x[,1:5000] y <-train$y
# Set labels for all digits that are 'not 5' to 0
y[y!=5] <- 0
# Set labels of digit 5 as 1
y[y==5] <- 1
# Set the data
y1 <- as.matrix(y)
y2 <- t(y1)
# Choose the 1st 5000 data
y3 <- y2[,1:5000]

#Execute the Deep Learning Model
retvals = L_Layer_DeepModel(x2, y3, layersDimensions,
hiddenActivationFunc='tanh',
learningRate = 0.3,
numIterations = 3000, print_cost = True)
# Plot cost vs iteration
costs <- retvals[['costs']]
numIterations = 3000
iterations <- seq(0,numIterations,by=1000)
df <-data.frame(iterations,costs)
ggplot(df,aes(x=iterations,y=costs)) + geom_point() +geom_line(color="blue") +
xlab('No of iterations') + ylab('Cost') + ggtitle("Cost vs No of iterations")

# Compute probability scores
scores <- computeScores(retvals$parameters, x2,hiddenActivationFunc='relu') a=y3==1 b=y3==0 # Compute probabilities of class 0 and class 1 class1=scores[a] class0=scores[b] # Plot ROC curve pr <-pr.curve(scores.class0=class1, scores.class1=class0, curve=T) plot(pr) The AUC curve hugs the top left corner and hence the performance of the classifier is quite good. ## 4c. Binary Classification using MNIST – Octave code This code to load MNIST data was taken from Daniel E blog. Precision recall curves are available in Matlab but are yet to be implemented in Octave’s statistics package.  load('./mnist/mnist.txt.gz'); % load the dataset # Subset the 'not 5' digits a=(trainY != 5); # Subset '5' b=(trainY == 5); #make a copy of trainY #Set 'not 5' as 0 and '5' as 1 y=trainY; y(a)=0; y(b)=1; X=trainX(1:5000,:); Y=y(1:5000); # Set the dimensions of layer layersDimensions=[784, 7,7,3,1]; # Compute the DL network [weights biases costs]=L_Layer_DeepModel(X', Y', layersDimensions, hiddenActivationFunc='relu', learningRate = 0.1, numIterations = 5000);  # Conclusion It was quite a challenge coding a Deep Learning Network in Python, R and Octave. The Deep Learning network implementation, in this post,is the base Deep Learning network, without any of the regularization methods included. Here are some key learning that I got while playing with different multi-layer networks on different problems a. Deep Learning Networks come with many levers, the hyper-parameters, – learning rate – activation unit – number of hidden layers – number of units per hidden layer – number of iterations while performing gradient descent b. Deep Networks are very sensitive. A change in any of the hyper-parameter makes it perform very differently c. Initially I thought adding more hidden layers, or more units per hidden layer will make the DL network better at learning. On the contrary, there is a performance degradation after the optimal DL configuration d. At a sub-optimal number of hidden layers or number of hidden units, gradient descent seems to get stuck at a local minima e. There were occasions when the cost came down, only to increase slowly as the number of iterations were increased. Probably early stopping would have helped. f. I also did come across situations of ‘exploding/vanishing gradient’, cost went to Inf/-Inf. Here I would think inclusion of ‘momentum method’ would have helped I intend to add the additional hyper-parameters of L1, L2 regularization, momentum method, early stopping etc. into the code in my future posts. Feel free to fork/clone the code from Github Deep Learning – Part 3, and take the DL network apart and play around with it. I will be continuing this series with more hyper-parameters to handle vanishing and exploding gradients, early stopping and regularization in the weeks to come. I also intend to add some more activation functions to this basic Multi-Layer Network. Hang around, there are more exciting things to come. Watch this space! To see all posts see Index of posts Advertisements # Deep Learning from first principles in Python, R and Octave – Part 2 “What does the world outside your head really ‘look’ like? Not only is there no color, there’s also no sound: the compression and expansion of air is picked up by the ears, and turned into electrical signals. The brain then presents these signals to us as mellifluous tones and swishes and clatters and jangles. Reality is also odorless: there’s no such thing as smell outside our brains. Molecules floating through the air bind to receptors in our nose and are interpreted as different smells by our brain. The real world is not full of rich sensory events; instead, our brains light up the world with their own sensuality.” The Brain: The Story of You” by David Eagleman The world is Maya, illusory. The ultimate reality, the Brahman, is all-pervading and all-permeating, which is colourless, odourless, tasteless, nameless and formless Bhagavad Gita ## 1. Introduction This post is a follow-up post to my earlier post Deep Learning from first principles in Python, R and Octave-Part 1. In the first part, I implemented Logistic Regression, in vectorized Python,R and Octave, with a wannabe Neural Network (a Neural Network with no hidden layers). In this second part, I implement a regular, but somewhat primitive Neural Network (a Neural Network with just 1 hidden layer). The 2nd part implements classification of manually created datasets, where the different clusters of the 2 classes are not linearly separable. Neural Network perform really well in learning all sorts of non-linear boundaries between classes. Initially logistic regression is used perform the classification and the decision boundary is plotted. Vanilla logistic regression performs quite poorly. Using SVMs with a radial basis kernel would have performed much better in creating non-linear boundaries. To see R and Python implementations of SVMs take a look at my post Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 4. You could also check out my book on Amazon Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Machine Learning in Stereo, in which I implement several Machine Learning algorithms on regression and classification, along with other necessary metrics that are used in Machine Learning. You can clone and fork this R Markdown file along with the vectorized implementations of the 3 layer Neural Network for Python, R and Octave from Github DeepLearning-Part2 ### 2. The 3 layer Neural Network A simple representation of a 3 layer Neural Network (NN) with 1 hidden layer is shown below. In the above Neural Network, there are 2 input features at the input layer, 3 hidden units at the hidden layer and 1 output layer as it deals with binary classification. The activation unit at the hidden layer can be a tanh, sigmoid, relu etc. At the output layer the activation is a sigmoid to handle binary classification # Superscript indicates layer 1 $z_{11} = w_{11}^{1}x_{1} + w_{21}^{1}x_{2} + b_{1}$ $z_{12} = w_{12}^{1}x_{1} + w_{22}^{1}x_{2} + b_{1}$ $z_{13} = w_{13}^{1}x_{1} + w_{23}^{1}x_{2} + b_{1}$ Also $a_{11} = tanh(z_{11})$ $a_{12} = tanh(z_{12})$ $a_{13} = tanh(z_{13})$ # Superscript indicates layer 2 $z_{21} = w_{11}^{2}a_{11} + w_{21}^{2}a_{12} + w_{31}^{2}a_{13} + b_{2}$ $a_{21} = sigmoid(z21)$ Hence $Z1= \begin{pmatrix} z11\\ z12\\ z13 \end{pmatrix} =\begin{pmatrix} w_{11}^{1} & w_{21}^{1} \\ w_{12}^{1} & w_{22}^{1} \\ w_{13}^{1} & w_{23}^{1} \end{pmatrix} * \begin{pmatrix} x1\\ x2 \end{pmatrix} + b_{1}$ And $A1= \begin{pmatrix} a11\\ a12\\ a13 \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} tanh(z11)\\ tanh(z12)\\ tanh(z13) \end{pmatrix}$ Similarly $Z2= z_{21} = \begin{pmatrix} w_{11}^{2} & w_{21}^{2} & w_{31}^{2} \end{pmatrix} *\begin{pmatrix} z_{11}\\ z_{12}\\ z_{13} \end{pmatrix} +b_{2}$ and $A2 = a_{21} = sigmoid(z_{21})$ These equations can be written as $Z1 = W1 * X + b1$ $A1 = tanh(Z1)$ $Z2 = W2 * A1 + b2$ $A2 = sigmoid(Z2)$ I) Some important results (a memory refresher!) $d/dx(e^{x}) = e^{x}$ and $d/dx(e^{-x}) = -e^{-x}$ -(a) and $sinhx = (e^{x} - e^{-x})/2$ and $coshx = (e^{x} + e^{-x})/2$ Using (a) we can shown that $d/dx(sinhx) = coshx$ and $d/dx(coshx) = sinhx$ (b) Now $d/dx(f(x)/g(x)) = (g(x)*d/dx(f(x)) - f(x)*d/dx(g(x)))/g(x)^{2}$ -(c) Since $tanhx =z= sinhx/coshx$ and using (b) we get $tanhx = (coshx*d/dx(sinhx) - coshx*d/dx(sinhx))/(1-sinhx^{2})$ Using the values of the derivatives of sinhx and coshx from (b) above we get $d/dx(tanhx) = (coshx^{2} - sinhx{2})/coshx{2} = 1 - tanhx^{2}$ Since $tanhx =z$ $d/dx(tanhx) = 1 - tanhx^{2}= 1 - z^{2}$ -(d) II) Derivatives $L=-(Ylog(A2) + (1-Y)log(1-A2))$ $dL/dA2 = -(Y/A2 + (1-Y)/(1-A2))$ Since $A2 = sigmoid(Z2)$ therefore $dA2/dZ2 = A2(1-A2)$ see Part1 $Z2 = W2A1 +b2$ $dZ2/dW2 = A1$ $dZ2/db2 = 1$ $A1 = tanh(Z1)$ and $dA1/dZ1 = 1 - A1^{2}$ $Z1 = W1X + b1$ $dZ1/dW1 = X$ $dZ1/db1 = 1$ III) Back propagation Using the derivatives from II) we can derive the following results using Chain Rule $\partial L/\partial Z2 = \partial L/\partial A2 * \partial A2/\partial Z2$ $= -(Y/A2 + (1-Y)/(1-A2)) * A2(1-A2) = A2 - Y$ $\partial L/\partial W2 = \partial L/\partial A2 * \partial A2/\partial Z2 * \partial Z2/\partial W2$ $= (A2-Y) *A1$ -(A) $\partial L/\partial b2 = \partial L/\partial A2 * \partial A2/\partial Z2 * \partial Z2/\partial b2 = (A2-Y)$ -(B) $\partial L/\partial Z1 = \partial L/\partial A2 * \partial A2/\partial Z2 * \partial Z2/\partial A1 *\partial A1/\partial Z1 = (A2-Y) * W2 * (1-A1^{2})$ $\partial L/\partial W1 = \partial L/\partial A2 * \partial A2/\partial Z2 * \partial Z2/\partial A1 *\partial A1/\partial Z1 *\partial Z1/\partial W1$ $=(A2-Y) * W2 * (1-A1^{2}) * X$ -(C) $\partial L/\partial b1 = \partial L/\partial A2 * \partial A2/\partial Z2 * \partial Z2/\partial A1 *dA1/dZ1 *dZ1/db1$ $= (A2-Y) * W2 * (1-A1^{2})$ -(D) IV) Gradient Descent The key computations in the backward cycle are $W1 = W1-learningRate * \partial L/\partial W1$ – From (C) $b1 = b1-learningRate * \partial L/\partial b1$ – From (D) $W2 = W2-learningRate * \partial L/\partial W2$ – From (A) $b2 = b2-learningRate * \partial L/\partial b2$ – From (B) The weights and biases (W1,b1,W2,b2) are updated for each iteration thus minimizing the loss/cost. These derivations can be represented pictorially using the computation graph (from the book Deep Learning by Ian Goodfellow, Joshua Bengio and Aaron Courville) ### 3. Manually create a data set that is not lineary separable Initially I create a dataset with 2 classes which has around 9 clusters that cannot be separated by linear boundaries. Note: This data set is saved as data.csv and is used for the R and Octave Neural networks to see how they perform on the same dataset. import numpy as np import matplotlib.pyplot as plt import matplotlib.colors import sklearn.linear_model from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs from matplotlib.colors import ListedColormap import sklearn import sklearn.datasets colors=['black','gold'] cmap = matplotlib.colors.ListedColormap(colors) X, y = make_blobs(n_samples = 400, n_features = 2, centers = 7, cluster_std = 1.3, random_state = 4) #Create 2 classes y=y.reshape(400,1) y = y % 2 #Plot the figure plt.figure() plt.title('Non-linearly separable classes') plt.scatter(X[:,0], X[:,1], c=y, marker= 'o', s=50,cmap=cmap) plt.savefig('fig1.png', bbox_inches='tight') ### 4. Logistic Regression On the above created dataset, classification with logistic regression is performed, and the decision boundary is plotted. It can be seen that logistic regression performs quite poorly import numpy as np import matplotlib.pyplot as plt import matplotlib.colors import sklearn.linear_model from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs from matplotlib.colors import ListedColormap import sklearn import sklearn.datasets #from DLfunctions import plot_decision_boundary execfile("./DLfunctions.py") # Since import does not work in Rmd!!! colors=['black','gold'] cmap = matplotlib.colors.ListedColormap(colors) X, y = make_blobs(n_samples = 400, n_features = 2, centers = 7, cluster_std = 1.3, random_state = 4) #Create 2 classes y=y.reshape(400,1) y = y % 2 # Train the logistic regression classifier clf = sklearn.linear_model.LogisticRegressionCV(); clf.fit(X, y); # Plot the decision boundary for logistic regression plot_decision_boundary_n(lambda x: clf.predict(x), X.T, y.T,"fig2.png")  ### 5. The 3 layer Neural Network in Python (vectorized) The vectorized implementation is included below. Note that in the case of Python a learning rate of 0.5 and 3 hidden units performs very well. ## Random data set with 9 clusters import numpy as np import matplotlib import matplotlib.pyplot as plt import sklearn.linear_model import pandas as pd from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs execfile("./DLfunctions.py") # Since import does not work in Rmd!!! X1, Y1 = make_blobs(n_samples = 400, n_features = 2, centers = 9, cluster_std = 1.3, random_state = 4) #Create 2 classes Y1=Y1.reshape(400,1) Y1 = Y1 % 2 X2=X1.T Y2=Y1.T #Perform gradient descent parameters,costs = computeNN(X2, Y2, numHidden = 4, learningRate=0.5, numIterations = 10000) plot_decision_boundary(lambda x: predict(parameters, x.T), X2, Y2,str(4),str(0.5),"fig3.png") ## Cost after iteration 0: 0.692669 ## Cost after iteration 1000: 0.246650 ## Cost after iteration 2000: 0.227801 ## Cost after iteration 3000: 0.226809 ## Cost after iteration 4000: 0.226518 ## Cost after iteration 5000: 0.226331 ## Cost after iteration 6000: 0.226194 ## Cost after iteration 7000: 0.226085 ## Cost after iteration 8000: 0.225994 ## Cost after iteration 9000: 0.225915 ### 6. The 3 layer Neural Network in R (vectorized) For this the dataset created by Python is saved to see how R performs on the same dataset. The vectorized implementation of a Neural Network was just a little more interesting as R does not have a similar package like ‘numpy’. While numpy handles broadcasting implicitly, in R I had to use the ‘sweep’ command to broadcast. The implementaion is included below. Note that since the initialization with random weights is slightly different, R performs best with a learning rate of 0.1 and with 6 hidden units source("DLfunctions2_1.R") z <- as.matrix(read.csv("data.csv",header=FALSE)) # x <- z[,1:2] y <- z[,3] x1 <- t(x) y1 <- t(y) #Perform gradient descent nn <-computeNN(x1, y1, 6, learningRate=0.1,numIterations=10000) # Good ## [1] 0.7075341 ## [1] 0.2606695 ## [1] 0.2198039 ## [1] 0.2091238 ## [1] 0.211146 ## [1] 0.2108461 ## [1] 0.2105351 ## [1] 0.210211 ## [1] 0.2099104 ## [1] 0.2096437 ## [1] 0.209409 plotDecisionBoundary(z,nn,6,0.1) ### 7. The 3 layer Neural Network in Octave (vectorized) This uses the same dataset that was generated using Python code. source("DL-function2.m") data=csvread("data.csv"); X=data(:,1:2); Y=data(:,3); # Make sure that the model parameters are correct. Take the transpose of X & Y #Perform gradient descent [W1,b1,W2,b2,costs]= computeNN(X', Y',4, learningRate=0.5, numIterations = 10000); ### 8a. Performance for different learning rates (Python) import numpy as np import matplotlib import matplotlib.pyplot as plt import sklearn.linear_model import pandas as pd from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs execfile("./DLfunctions.py") # Since import does not work in Rmd!!! # Create data X1, Y1 = make_blobs(n_samples = 400, n_features = 2, centers = 9, cluster_std = 1.3, random_state = 4) #Create 2 classes Y1=Y1.reshape(400,1) Y1 = Y1 % 2 X2=X1.T Y2=Y1.T # Create a list of learning rates learningRate=[0.5,1.2,3.0] df=pd.DataFrame() #Compute costs for each learning rate for lr in learningRate: parameters,costs = computeNN(X2, Y2, numHidden = 4, learningRate=lr, numIterations = 10000) print(costs) df1=pd.DataFrame(costs) df=pd.concat([df,df1],axis=1) #Set the iterations iterations=[0,1000,2000,3000,4000,5000,6000,7000,8000,9000] #Create data frame #Set index df1=df.set_index([iterations]) df1.columns=[0.5,1.2,3.0] fig=df1.plot() fig=plt.title("Cost vs No of Iterations for different learning rates") plt.savefig('fig4.png', bbox_inches='tight') ### 8b. Performance for different hidden units (Python) import numpy as np import matplotlib import matplotlib.pyplot as plt import sklearn.linear_model import pandas as pd from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs execfile("./DLfunctions.py") # Since import does not work in Rmd!!! #Create data set X1, Y1 = make_blobs(n_samples = 400, n_features = 2, centers = 9, cluster_std = 1.3, random_state = 4) #Create 2 classes Y1=Y1.reshape(400,1) Y1 = Y1 % 2 X2=X1.T Y2=Y1.T # Make a list of hidden unis numHidden=[3,5,7] df=pd.DataFrame() #Compute costs for different hidden units for numHid in numHidden: parameters,costs = computeNN(X2, Y2, numHidden = numHid, learningRate=1.2, numIterations = 10000) print(costs) df1=pd.DataFrame(costs) df=pd.concat([df,df1],axis=1) #Set the iterations iterations=[0,1000,2000,3000,4000,5000,6000,7000,8000,9000] #Set index df1=df.set_index([iterations]) df1.columns=[3,5,7] #Plot fig=df1.plot() fig=plt.title("Cost vs No of Iterations for different no of hidden units") plt.savefig('fig5.png', bbox_inches='tight') ### 9a. Performance for different learning rates (R) source("DLfunctions2_1.R") # Read data z <- as.matrix(read.csv("data.csv",header=FALSE)) # x <- z[,1:2] y <- z[,3] x1 <- t(x) y1 <- t(y) #Loop through learning rates and compute costs learningRate <-c(0.1,1.2,3.0) df <- NULL for(i in seq_along(learningRate)){ nn <- computeNN(x1, y1, 6, learningRate=learningRate[i],numIterations=10000) cost <- nn$costs
df <- cbind(df,cost)

}      

#Create dataframe
df <- data.frame(df)
iterations=seq(0,10000,by=1000)
df <- cbind(iterations,df)
names(df) <- c("iterations","0.5","1.2","3.0")
library(reshape2)
df1 <- melt(df,id="iterations")  # Melt the data
#Plot
ggplot(df1) + geom_line(aes(x=iterations,y=value,colour=variable),size=1)  +
xlab("Iterations") +
ylab('Cost') + ggtitle("Cost vs No iterations for  different learning rates")

### 9b. Performance  for different hidden units (R)

source("DLfunctions2_1.R")
# Loop through Num hidden units
numHidden <-c(4,6,9)
df <- NULL
for(i in seq_along(numHidden)){
nn <-  computeNN(x1, y1, numHidden[i], learningRate=0.1,numIterations=10000)
cost <- nn$costs df <- cbind(df,cost) }  df <- data.frame(df) iterations=seq(0,10000,by=1000) df <- cbind(iterations,df) names(df) <- c("iterations","4","6","9") library(reshape2) # Melt df1 <- melt(df,id="iterations") # Plot ggplot(df1) + geom_line(aes(x=iterations,y=value,colour=variable),size=1) + xlab("Iterations") + ylab('Cost') + ggtitle("Cost vs No iterations for different number of hidden units") ## 10a. Performance of the Neural Network for different learning rates (Octave) source("DL-function2.m") plotLRCostVsIterations() print -djph figa.jpg ## 10b. Performance of the Neural Network for different number of hidden units (Octave) source("DL-function2.m") plotHiddenCostVsIterations() print -djph figa.jpg ## 11. Turning the heat on the Neural Network In this 2nd part I create a a central region of positives and and the outside region as negatives. The points are generated using the equation of a circle (x – a)^{2} + (y -b) ^{2} = R^{2} . How does the 3 layer Neural Network perform on this? Here’s a look! Note: The same dataset is also used for R and Octave Neural Network constructions ## 12. Manually creating a circular central region import numpy as np import matplotlib.pyplot as plt import matplotlib.colors import sklearn.linear_model from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs from matplotlib.colors import ListedColormap import sklearn import sklearn.datasets colors=['black','gold'] cmap = matplotlib.colors.ListedColormap(colors) x1=np.random.uniform(0,10,800).reshape(800,1) x2=np.random.uniform(0,10,800).reshape(800,1) X=np.append(x1,x2,axis=1) X.shape # Create (x-a)^2 + (y-b)^2 = R^2 # Create a subset of values where squared is <0,4. Perform ravel() to flatten this vector a=(np.power(X[:,0]-5,2) + np.power(X[:,1]-5,2) <= 6).ravel() Y=a.reshape(800,1) cmap = matplotlib.colors.ListedColormap(colors) plt.figure() plt.title('Non-linearly separable classes') plt.scatter(X[:,0], X[:,1], c=Y, marker= 'o', s=15,cmap=cmap) plt.savefig('fig6.png', bbox_inches='tight') ### 13a. Decision boundary with hidden units=4 and learning rate = 2.2 (Python) With the above hyper parameters the decision boundary is triangular import numpy as np import matplotlib.pyplot as plt import matplotlib.colors import sklearn.linear_model execfile("./DLfunctions.py") x1=np.random.uniform(0,10,800).reshape(800,1) x2=np.random.uniform(0,10,800).reshape(800,1) X=np.append(x1,x2,axis=1) X.shape # Create a subset of values where squared is <0,4. Perform ravel() to flatten this vector a=(np.power(X[:,0]-5,2) + np.power(X[:,1]-5,2) <= 6).ravel() Y=a.reshape(800,1) X2=X.T Y2=Y.T parameters,costs = computeNN(X2, Y2, numHidden = 4, learningRate=2.2, numIterations = 10000) plot_decision_boundary(lambda x: predict(parameters, x.T), X2, Y2,str(4),str(2.2),"fig7.png")  ## Cost after iteration 0: 0.692836 ## Cost after iteration 1000: 0.331052 ## Cost after iteration 2000: 0.326428 ## Cost after iteration 3000: 0.474887 ## Cost after iteration 4000: 0.247989 ## Cost after iteration 5000: 0.218009 ## Cost after iteration 6000: 0.201034 ## Cost after iteration 7000: 0.197030 ## Cost after iteration 8000: 0.193507 ## Cost after iteration 9000: 0.191949 ### 13b. Decision boundary with hidden units=12 and learning rate = 2.2 (Python) With the above hyper parameters the decision boundary is triangular import numpy as np import matplotlib.pyplot as plt import matplotlib.colors import sklearn.linear_model execfile("./DLfunctions.py") x1=np.random.uniform(0,10,800).reshape(800,1) x2=np.random.uniform(0,10,800).reshape(800,1) X=np.append(x1,x2,axis=1) X.shape # Create a subset of values where squared is <0,4. Perform ravel() to flatten this vector a=(np.power(X[:,0]-5,2) + np.power(X[:,1]-5,2) <= 6).ravel() Y=a.reshape(800,1) X2=X.T Y2=Y.T parameters,costs = computeNN(X2, Y2, numHidden = 12, learningRate=2.2, numIterations = 10000) plot_decision_boundary(lambda x: predict(parameters, x.T), X2, Y2,str(12),str(2.2),"fig8.png")  ## Cost after iteration 0: 0.693291 ## Cost after iteration 1000: 0.383318 ## Cost after iteration 2000: 0.298807 ## Cost after iteration 3000: 0.251735 ## Cost after iteration 4000: 0.177843 ## Cost after iteration 5000: 0.130414 ## Cost after iteration 6000: 0.152400 ## Cost after iteration 7000: 0.065359 ## Cost after iteration 8000: 0.050921 ## Cost after iteration 9000: 0.039719 ### 14a. Decision boundary with hidden units=9 and learning rate = 0.5 (R) When the number of hidden units is 6 and the learning rate is 0,1, is also a triangular shape in R source("DLfunctions2_1.R") z <- as.matrix(read.csv("data1.csv",header=FALSE)) # N x <- z[,1:2] y <- z[,3] x1 <- t(x) y1 <- t(y) nn <-computeNN(x1, y1, 9, learningRate=0.5,numIterations=10000) # Triangular ## [1] 0.8398838 ## [1] 0.3303621 ## [1] 0.3127731 ## [1] 0.3012791 ## [1] 0.3305543 ## [1] 0.3303964 ## [1] 0.2334615 ## [1] 0.1920771 ## [1] 0.2341225 ## [1] 0.2188118 ## [1] 0.2082687 plotDecisionBoundary(z,nn,6,0.1) ### 14b. Decision boundary with hidden units=8 and learning rate = 0.1 (R) source("DLfunctions2_1.R") z <- as.matrix(read.csv("data1.csv",header=FALSE)) # N x <- z[,1:2] y <- z[,3] x1 <- t(x) y1 <- t(y) nn <-computeNN(x1, y1, 8, learningRate=0.1,numIterations=10000) # Hemisphere ## [1] 0.7273279 ## [1] 0.3169335 ## [1] 0.2378464 ## [1] 0.1688635 ## [1] 0.1368466 ## [1] 0.120664 ## [1] 0.111211 ## [1] 0.1043362 ## [1] 0.09800573 ## [1] 0.09126161 ## [1] 0.0840379 plotDecisionBoundary(z,nn,8,0.1) ### 15a. Decision boundary with hidden units=12 and learning rate = 1.5 (Octave) source("DL-function2.m") data=csvread("data1.csv"); X=data(:,1:2); Y=data(:,3); # Make sure that the model parameters are correct. Take the transpose of X & Y [W1,b1,W2,b2,costs]= computeNN(X', Y',12, learningRate=1.5, numIterations = 10000); plotDecisionBoundary(data, W1,b1,W2,b2) print -djpg fige.jpg Conclusion: This post implemented a 3 layer Neural Network to create non-linear boundaries while performing classification. Clearly the Neural Network performs very well when the number of hidden units and learning rate are varied. To be continued… Watch this space!! To see all posts check Index of posts # Deep Learning from first principles in Python, R and Octave – Part 1 “You don’t perceive objects as they are. You perceive them as you are.” “Your interpretation of physical objects has everything to do with the historical trajectory of your brain – and little to do with the objects themselves.” “The brain generates its own reality, even before it receives information coming in from the eyes and the other senses. This is known as the internal model”  David Eagleman - The Brain: The Story of You This is the first in the series of posts, I intend to write on Deep Learning. This post is inspired by the Deep Learning Specialization by Prof Andrew Ng on Coursera and Neural Networks for Machine Learning by Prof Geoffrey Hinton also on Coursera. In this post I implement Logistic regression with a 2 layer Neural Network i.e. a Neural Network that just has an input layer and an output layer and with no hidden layer.I am certain that any self-respecting Deep Learning/Neural Network would consider a Neural Network without hidden layers as no Neural Network at all! This 2 layer network is implemented in Python, R and Octave languages. I have included Octave, into the mix, as Octave is a close cousin of Matlab. These implementations in Python, R and Octave are equivalent vectorized implementations. So, if you are familiar in any one of the languages, you should be able to look at the corresponding code in the other two. You can download this R Markdown file and Octave code from DeepLearning -Part 1 To start with, Logistic Regression is performed using sklearn’s logistic regression package for the cancer data set also from sklearn. This is shown below ## 1. Logistic Regression import numpy as np import pandas as pd import os import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.linear_model import LogisticRegression from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs from sklearn.metrics import confusion_matrix from matplotlib.colors import ListedColormap from sklearn.datasets import load_breast_cancer # Load the cancer data (X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True) X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X_cancer, y_cancer, random_state = 0) # Call the Logisitic Regression function clf = LogisticRegression().fit(X_train, y_train) print('Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on training set: {:.2f}' .format(clf.score(X_train, y_train))) print('Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on test set: {:.2f}' .format(clf.score(X_test, y_test))) ## Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on training set: 0.96 ## Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on test set: 0.96 To check on other classification algorithms, check my post Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 2. You could also take a look at my book, available on Amazon , in which I implement the most popular Machine Learning algorithms in both R and Python – My book ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python’ on Amazon ## 2. Logistic Regression as a 2 layer Neural Network In the following section Logistic Regression is implemented as a 2 layer Neural Network in Python, R and Octave. The same cancer data set from sklearn will be used to train and test the Neural Network in Python, R and Octave. This can be represented diagrammatically as below The cancer data set has 30 input features, and the target variable ‘output’ is either 0 or 1. Hence the sigmoid activation function will be used in the output layer for classification. This simple 2 layer Neural Network is shown below At the input layer there are 30 features and the corresponding weights of these inputs which are initialized to small random values. $Z= w_{1}x_{1} +w_{2}x_{2} +..+ w_{30}x_{30} + b$ where ‘b’ is the bias term The Activation function is the sigmoid function which is $a= 1/(1+e^{-z})$ The Loss, when the sigmoid function is used in the output layer, is given by $L=-(ylog(a) + (1-y)log(1-a))$ (1) ## Gradient Descent ### Forward propagation In forward propagation cycle of the Neural Network the output Z and the output of activation function, the sigmoid function, is first computed. Then using the output ‘y’ for the given features, the ‘Loss’ is computed using equation (1) above. ### Backward propagation The backward propagation cycle determines how the ‘Loss’ is impacted for small variations from the previous layers upto the input layer. In other words, backward propagation computes the changes in the weights at the input layer, which will minimize the loss. Several cycles of gradient descent are performed in the path of steepest descent to find the local minima. In other words the set of weights and biases, at the input layer, which will result in the lowest loss is computed by gradient descent. The weights at the input layer are decreased by a parameter known as the ‘learning rate’. Too big a ‘learning rate’ can overshoot the local minima, and too small a ‘learning rate’ can take a long time to reach the local minima. This is done for ‘m’ training examples. Chain rule of differentiation Let y=f(u) and u=g(x) then $\partial y/\partial x = \partial y/\partial u * \partial u/\partial x$ Derivative of sigmoid $\sigma=1/(1+e^{-z})$ Let $x= 1 + e^{-z}$ then $\sigma = 1/x$ $\partial \sigma/\partial x = -1/x^{2}$ $\partial x/\partial z = -e^{-z}$ Using the chain rule of differentiation we get $\partial \sigma/\partial z = \partial \sigma/\partial x * \partial x/\partial z$ $=-1/(1+e^{-z})^{2}* -e^{-z} = e^{-z}/(1+e^{-z})^{2}$ Therefore $\partial \sigma/\partial z = \sigma(1-\sigma)$ -(2) The 3 equations for the 2 layer Neural Network representation of Logistic Regression are $L=-(y*log(a) + (1-y)*log(1-a))$ -(a) $a=1/(1+e^{-z})$ -(b) $Z= w_{1}x_{1} +w_{2}x_{2} +...+ w_{30}x_{30} +b$ -(c) The back propagation step requires the computation of $dL/dw_{i}$ and $dL/db_{i}$. In the case of regression it would be $dE/dw_{i}$ and $dE/db_{i}$ where dE is the Mean Squared Error function. Computing the derivatives for back propagation we have $dL/da = -(y/a + (1-y)/(1-a))$ -(d) because $d/dx(logx) = 1/x$ Also from equation (2) we get $da/dZ = a (1-a)$ – (e) By chain rule $\partial L/\partial Z = \partial L/\partial a * \partial a/\partial Z$ therefore substituting the results of (d) & (e) we get $\partial L/\partial Z = -(y/a + (1-y)/(1-a)) * a(1-a) = a-y$ (f) Finally $\partial L/\partial w_{i}= \partial L/\partial a * \partial a/\partial Z * \partial Z/\partial w_{i}$ -(g) $\partial Z/\partial w_{i} = x_{i}$ – (h) and from (f) we have $\partial L/\partial Z =a-y$ Therefore (g) reduces to $\partial L/\partial w_{i} = x_{i}* (a-y)$ -(i) Also $\partial L/\partial b = \partial L/\partial a * \partial a/\partial Z * \partial Z/\partial b$ -(j) Since $\partial Z/\partial b = 1$ $\partial L/\partial b = a-y$ The gradient computes the weights at the input layer and the corresponding bias by using the values of $dw_{i}$ and $db$ $w_{i} := w_{i} -\alpha * dw_{i}$ $b := b -\alpha * db$ I found the computation graph representation in the book Deep Learning: Ian Goodfellow, Yoshua Bengio, Aaron Courville, very useful to visualize and also compute the backward propagation. For the 2 layer Neural Network of Logistic Regression the computation graph is shown below ### 3. Neural Network for Logistic Regression -Python code (vectorized) import numpy as np import pandas as pd import os import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split # Define the sigmoid function def sigmoid(z): a=1/(1+np.exp(-z)) return a # Initialize def initialize(dim): w = np.zeros(dim).reshape(dim,1) b = 0 return w # Compute the loss def computeLoss(numTraining,Y,A): loss=-1/numTraining *np.sum(Y*np.log(A) + (1-Y)*(np.log(1-A))) return(loss) # Execute the forward propagation def forwardPropagation(w,b,X,Y): # Compute Z Z=np.dot(w.T,X)+b # Determine the number of training samples numTraining=float(len(X)) # Compute the output of the sigmoid activation function A=sigmoid(Z) #Compute the loss loss = computeLoss(numTraining,Y,A) # Compute the gradients dZ, dw and db dZ=A-Y dw=1/numTraining*np.dot(X,dZ.T) db=1/numTraining*np.sum(dZ) # Return the results as a dictionary gradients = {"dw": dw, "db": db} loss = np.squeeze(loss) return gradients,loss # Compute Gradient Descent def gradientDescent(w, b, X, Y, numIerations, learningRate): losses=[] idx =[] # Iterate for i in range(numIerations): gradients,loss=forwardPropagation(w,b,X,Y) #Get the derivates dw = gradients["dw"] db = gradients["db"] w = w-learningRate*dw b = b-learningRate*db # Store the loss if i % 100 == 0: idx.append(i) losses.append(loss) # Set params and grads params = {"w": w, "b": b} grads = {"dw": dw, "db": db} return params, grads, losses,idx # Predict the output for a training set def predict(w,b,X): size=X.shape[1] yPredicted=np.zeros((1,size)) Z=np.dot(w.T,X) # Compute the sigmoid A=sigmoid(Z) for i in range(A.shape[1]): #If the value is > 0.5 then set as 1 if(A[0][i] > 0.5): yPredicted[0][i]=1 else: # Else set as 0 yPredicted[0][i]=0 return yPredicted #Normalize the data def normalize(x): x_norm = None x_norm = np.linalg.norm(x,axis=1,keepdims=True) x= x/x_norm return x # Run the 2 layer Neural Network on the cancer data set from sklearn.datasets import load_breast_cancer # Load the cancer data (X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True) # Create train and test sets X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X_cancer, y_cancer, random_state = 0) # Normalize the data for better performance X_train1=normalize(X_train) # Create weight vectors of zeros. The size is the number of features in the data set=30 w=np.zeros((X_train.shape[1],1)) #w=np.zeros((30,1)) b=0 #Normalize the training data so that gradient descent performs better X_train1=normalize(X_train) #Transpose X_train so that we have a matrix as (features, numSamples) X_train2=X_train1.T # Reshape to remove the rank 1 array and then transpose y_train1=y_train.reshape(len(y_train),1) y_train2=y_train1.T # Run gradient descent for 4000 times and compute the weights parameters, grads, costs,idx = gradientDescent(w, b, X_train2, y_train2, numIerations=4000, learningRate=0.75) w = parameters["w"] b = parameters["b"] # Normalize X_test X_test1=normalize(X_test) #Transpose X_train so that we have a matrix as (features, numSamples) X_test2=X_test1.T #Reshape y_test y_test1=y_test.reshape(len(y_test),1) y_test2=y_test1.T # Predict the values for yPredictionTest = predict(w, b, X_test2) yPredictionTrain = predict(w, b, X_train2) # Print the accuracy print("train accuracy: {} %".format(100 - np.mean(np.abs(yPredictionTrain - y_train2)) * 100)) print("test accuracy: {} %".format(100 - np.mean(np.abs(yPredictionTest - y_test)) * 100)) # Plot the Costs vs the number of iterations fig1=plt.plot(idx,costs) fig1=plt.title("Gradient descent-Cost vs No of iterations") fig1=plt.xlabel("No of iterations") fig1=plt.ylabel("Cost") fig1.figure.savefig("fig1", bbox_inches='tight') ## train accuracy: 90.3755868545 % ## test accuracy: 89.5104895105 % Note: It can be seen that the Accuracy on the training and test set is 90.37% and 89.51%. This is comparatively poorer than the 96% which the logistic regression of sklearn achieves! But this is mainly because of the absence of hidden layers which is the real power of neural networks. ### 4. Neural Network for Logistic Regression -R code (vectorized) source("RFunctions-1.R") # Define the sigmoid function sigmoid <- function(z){ a <- 1/(1+ exp(-z)) a } # Compute the loss computeLoss <- function(numTraining,Y,A){ loss <- -1/numTraining* sum(Y*log(A) + (1-Y)*log(1-A)) return(loss) } # Compute forward propagation forwardPropagation <- function(w,b,X,Y){ # Compute Z Z <- t(w) %*% X +b #Set the number of samples numTraining <- ncol(X) # Compute the activation function A=sigmoid(Z) #Compute the loss loss <- computeLoss(numTraining,Y,A) # Compute the gradients dZ, dw and db dZ<-A-Y dw<-1/numTraining * X %*% t(dZ) db<-1/numTraining*sum(dZ) fwdProp <- list("loss" = loss, "dw" = dw, "db" = db) return(fwdProp) } # Perform one cycle of Gradient descent gradientDescent <- function(w, b, X, Y, numIerations, learningRate){ losses <- NULL idx <- NULL # Loop through the number of iterations for(i in 1:numIerations){ fwdProp <-forwardPropagation(w,b,X,Y) #Get the derivatives dw <- fwdProp$dw
db <- fwdProp$db #Perform gradient descent w = w-learningRate*dw b = b-learningRate*db l <- fwdProp$loss
# Stoe the loss
if(i %% 100 == 0){
idx <- c(idx,i)
losses <- c(losses,l)
}
}

# Return the weights and losses

}

# Compute the predicted value for input
predict <- function(w,b,X){
m=dim(X)[2]
# Create a ector of 0's
yPredicted=matrix(rep(0,m),nrow=1,ncol=m)
Z <- t(w) %*% X +b
# Compute sigmoid
A=sigmoid(Z)
for(i in 1:dim(A)[2]){
# If A > 0.5 set value as 1
if(A[1,i] > 0.5)
yPredicted[1,i]=1
else
# Else set as 0
yPredicted[1,i]=0
}

return(yPredicted)
}

# Normalize the matrix
normalize <- function(x){
#Create the norm of the matrix.Perform the Frobenius norm of the matrix
n<-as.matrix(sqrt(rowSums(x^2)))
#Sweep by rows by norm. Note '1' in the function which performing on every row
normalized<-sweep(x, 1, n, FUN="/")
return(normalized)
}

# Run the 2 layer Neural Network on the cancer data set
# Read the data (from sklearn)
# Rename the target variable
names(cancer) <- c(seq(1,30),"output")
# Split as training and test sets
train_idx <- trainTestSplit(cancer,trainPercent=75,seed=5)
train <- cancer[train_idx, ]
test <- cancer[-train_idx, ]

# Set the features
X_train <-train[,1:30]
y_train <- train[,31]
X_test <- test[,1:30]
y_test <- test[,31]
# Create a matrix of 0's with the number of features
w <-matrix(rep(0,dim(X_train)[2]))
b <-0
X_train1 <- normalize(X_train)
X_train2=t(X_train1)

# Reshape  then transpose
y_train1=as.matrix(y_train)
y_train2=t(y_train1)

# Normalize X_test
X_test1=normalize(X_test)
#Transpose X_train so that we have a matrix as (features, numSamples)
X_test2=t(X_test1)

#Reshape y_test and take transpose
y_test1=as.matrix(y_test)
y_test2=t(y_test1)

# Use the values of the weights generated from Gradient Descent
yPredictionTest = predict(gradDescent$w, gradDescent$b, X_test2)
yPredictionTrain = predict(gradDescent$w, gradDescent$b, X_train2)

sprintf("Train accuracy: %f",(100 - mean(abs(yPredictionTrain - y_train2)) * 100))
## [1] "Train accuracy: 90.845070"
sprintf("test accuracy: %f",(100 - mean(abs(yPredictionTest - y_test)) * 100))
## [1] "test accuracy: 87.323944"
df <-data.frame(gradDescent$idx, gradDescent$losses)
names(df) <- c("iterations","losses")
ggplot(df,aes(x=iterations,y=losses)) + geom_point() + geom_line(col="blue") +
ggtitle("Gradient Descent - Losses vs No of Iterations") +
xlab("No of iterations") + ylab("Losses")

### 4. Neural Network for Logistic Regression -Octave code (vectorized)

 1; # Define sigmoid function function a = sigmoid(z) a = 1 ./ (1+ exp(-z)); end # Compute the loss function loss=computeLoss(numtraining,Y,A) loss = -1/numtraining * sum((Y .* log(A)) + (1-Y) .* log(1-A)); end
 # Perform forward propagation function [loss,dw,db,dZ] = forwardPropagation(w,b,X,Y) % Compute Z Z = w' * X + b; numtraining = size(X)(1,2); # Compute sigmoid A = sigmoid(Z);
 #Compute loss. Note this is element wise product loss =computeLoss(numtraining,Y,A); # Compute the gradients dZ, dw and db dZ = A-Y; dw = 1/numtraining* X * dZ'; db =1/numtraining*sum(dZ);

end
 # Compute Gradient Descent function [w,b,dw,db,losses,index]=gradientDescent(w, b, X, Y, numIerations, learningRate) #Initialize losses and idx losses=[]; index=[]; # Loop through the number of iterations for i=1:numIerations, [loss,dw,db,dZ] = forwardPropagation(w,b,X,Y); # Perform Gradient descent w = w - learningRate*dw; b = b - learningRate*db; if(mod(i,100) ==0) # Append index and loss index = [index i]; losses = [losses loss]; endif

end
end
 # Determine the predicted value for dataset function yPredicted = predict(w,b,X) m = size(X)(1,2); yPredicted=zeros(1,m); # Compute Z Z = w' * X + b; # Compute sigmoid A = sigmoid(Z); for i=1:size(X)(1,2), # Set predicted as 1 if A > 0,5 if(A(1,i) >= 0.5) yPredicted(1,i)=1; else yPredicted(1,i)=0; endif end end
 # Normalize by dividing each value by the sum of squares function normalized = normalize(x) # Compute Frobenius norm. Square the elements, sum rows and then find square root a = sqrt(sum(x .^ 2,2)); # Perform element wise division normalized = x ./ a; end
 # Split into train and test sets function [X_train,y_train,X_test,y_test] = trainTestSplit(dataset,trainPercent) # Create a random index ix = randperm(length(dataset)); # Split into training trainSize = floor(trainPercent/100 * length(dataset)); train=dataset(ix(1:trainSize),:); # And test test=dataset(ix(trainSize+1:length(dataset)),:); X_train = train(:,1:30); y_train = train(:,31); X_test = test(:,1:30); y_test = test(:,31); end

 cancer=csvread("cancer.csv"); [X_train,y_train,X_test,y_test] = trainTestSplit(cancer,75); w=zeros(size(X_train)(1,2),1); b=0; X_train1=normalize(X_train); X_train2=X_train1'; y_train1=y_train'; [w1,b1,dw,db,losses,idx]=gradientDescent(w, b, X_train2, y_train1, numIerations=3000, learningRate=0.75); # Normalize X_test X_test1=normalize(X_test); #Transpose X_train so that we have a matrix as (features, numSamples) X_test2=X_test1'; y_test1=y_test'; # Use the values of the weights generated from Gradient Descent yPredictionTest = predict(w1, b1, X_test2); yPredictionTrain = predict(w1, b1, X_train2); 

 trainAccuracy=100-mean(abs(yPredictionTrain - y_train1))*100 testAccuracy=100- mean(abs(yPredictionTest - y_test1))*100 trainAccuracy = 90.845 testAccuracy = 89.510 graphics_toolkit('gnuplot') plot(idx,losses); title ('Gradient descent- Cost vs No of iterations'); xlabel ("No of iterations"); ylabel ("Cost");

Conclusion
This post starts with a simple 2 layer Neural Network implementation of Logistic Regression. Clearly the performance of this simple Neural Network is comparatively poor to the highly optimized sklearn’s Logistic Regression. This is because the above neural network did not have any hidden layers. Deep Learning & Neural Networks achieve extraordinary performance because of the presence of deep hidden layers

The Deep Learning journey has begun… Don’t miss the bus!
Stay tuned for more interesting posts in Deep Learning!!

To see all posts check Index of posts

# The 3rd paperback & kindle editions of my books on Cricket, now on Amazon

The 3rd  paperback & kindle edition of both my books on cricket is now available on Amazon

a) Cricket analytics with cricketr, Third Edition. The paperback edition is $12.99 and the kindle edition is$4.99/Rs320.  This book is based on my R package ‘cricketr‘, available on CRAN and uses ESPN Cricinfo Statsguru

b) Beaten by sheer pace! Cricket analytics with yorkr, 3rd edition . The paperback is $12.99 and the kindle version is$6.99/Rs448. This is based on my R package ‘yorkr‘ on CRAN and uses data from Cricsheet

Note: In the 3rd edition of  the paperback book, the charts will be in black and white. If you would like the charts to be in color, please check out the 2nd edition of these books see More book, more cricket! 2nd edition of my books now on Amazon

To see all posts see Index of posts

# My book ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python’ on Amazon

My book ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Machine Learning in stereo’ is now available in both paperback ($9.99) and kindle ($6.97/Rs449) versions. In this book I implement some of the most common, but important Machine Learning algorithms in R and equivalent Python code. This is almost like listening to parallel channels of music in stereo!
1. Practical machine with R and Python – Machine Learning in Stereo (Paperback)
2. Practical machine with R and Python – Machine Learning in Stereo (Kindle)
This book is ideal both for beginners and the experts in R and/or Python. Those starting their journey into datascience and ML will find the first 3 chapters useful, as they touch upon the most important programming constructs in R and Python and also deal with equivalent statements in R and Python. Those who are expert in either of the languages, R or Python, will find the equivalent code ideal for brushing up on the other language. And finally,those who are proficient in both languages, can use the R and Python implementations to internalize the ML algorithms better.

Here is a look at the topics covered

Essential R …………………………………….. 7
Essential Python for Datascience ………………..   54
R vs Python ……………………………………. 77
Regression of a continuous variable ………………. 96
Classification and Cross Validation ……………….113
Regression techniques and regularization …………. 134
SVMs, Decision Trees and Validation curves …………175
Splines, GAMs, Random Forests and Boosting …………202
PCA, K-Means and Hierarchical Clustering …………. 234

Hope you have a great time learning as I did while implementing these algorithms!

# Introduction

This is the final and concluding part of my series on ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python’. In this series I included the implementations of the most common Machine Learning algorithms in R and Python. The algorithms implemented were

1. Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 1 In this initial post, I touch upon regression of a continuous target variable. Specifically I touch upon Univariate, Multivariate, Polynomial regression and KNN regression in both R and Python
2. Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 2 In this post, I discuss Logistic Regression, KNN classification and Cross Validation error for both LOOCV and K-Fold in both R and Python
3. Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 3 This 3rd part included feature selection in Machine Learning. Specifically I touch best fit, forward fit, backward fit, ridge(L2 regularization) & lasso (L1 regularization). The post includes equivalent code in R and Python.
4. Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 4 In this part I discussed SVMs, Decision Trees, Validation, Precision-Recall, AUC and ROC curves
5. Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 5  In this penultimate part, I touch upon B-splines, natural splines, smoothing spline, Generalized Additive Models(GAMs), Decision Trees, Random Forests and Gradient Boosted Treess.

In this last part I cover Unsupervised Learning. Specifically I cover the implementations of Principal Component Analysis (PCA). K-Means and Heirarchical Clustering. You can download this R Markdown file from Github at MachineLearning-RandPython-Part6

The content of this post and much more is now available as a compact book  on Amazon in both formats – as Paperback ($9.99) and a Kindle version($6.99/Rs449/). see ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Machine Learning in stereo

## 1.1a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) – R code

Principal Component Analysis is used to reduce the dimensionality of the input. In the code below 8 x 8 pixel of handwritten digits is reduced into its principal components. Then a scatter plot of the first 2 principal components give a very good visial representation of the data

library(dplyr)
library(ggplot2)
#Note: This example is adapted from an the example in the book Python Datascience handbook by
# Jake VanderPlas (https://jakevdp.github.io/PythonDataScienceHandbook/05.09-principal-component-analysis.html)

# Read the digits data (From sklearn datasets)
# Create a digits classes target variable
digitClasses <- factor(digits$X0.000000000000000000e.00.29) #Invoke the Principal Componsent analysis on columns 1-64 digitsPCA=prcomp(digits[,1:64]) # Create a dataframe of PCA df <- data.frame(digitsPCA$x)
# Bind the digit classes
df1 <- cbind(df,digitClasses)
# Plot only the first 2 Principal components as a scatter plot. This plot uses only the
# first 2 principal components
ggplot(df1,aes(x=PC1,y=PC2,col=digitClasses)) + geom_point() +
ggtitle("Top 2 Principal Components")

## 1.1 b Variance explained vs no principal components – R code

In the code below the variance explained vs the number of principal components is plotted. It can be seen that with 20 Principal components almost 90% of the variance is explained by this reduced dimensional model.

# Read the digits data (from sklearn datasets)
# Digits target
digitClasses <- factor(digits$X0.000000000000000000e.00.29) digitsPCA=prcomp(digits[,1:64]) # Get the Standard Deviation sd=digitsPCA$sdev
# Compute the variance
digitsVar=digitsPCA$sdev^2 #Compute the percent variance explained percentVarExp=digitsVar/sum(digitsVar) # Plot the percent variance exlained as a function of the number of principal components #plot(cumsum(percentVarExp), xlab="Principal Component", # ylab="Cumulative Proportion of Variance Explained", # main="Principal Components vs % Variance explained",ylim=c(0,1),type='l',lwd=2, # col="blue") ## 1.1c Principal Component Analysis (PCA) – Python code import numpy as np from sklearn.decomposition import PCA from sklearn import decomposition from sklearn import datasets import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.datasets import load_digits # Load the digits data digits = load_digits() # Select only the first 2 principal components pca = PCA(2) # project from 64 to 2 dimensions #Compute the first 2 PCA projected = pca.fit_transform(digits.data) # Plot a scatter plot of the first 2 principal components plt.scatter(projected[:, 0], projected[:, 1], c=digits.target, edgecolor='none', alpha=0.5, cmap=plt.cm.get_cmap('spectral', 10)) plt.xlabel('PCA 1') plt.ylabel('PCA 2') plt.colorbar(); plt.title("Top 2 Principal Components") plt.savefig('fig1.png', bbox_inches='tight') ## 1.1 b Variance vs no principal components ## – Python code import numpy as np from sklearn.decomposition import PCA from sklearn import decomposition from sklearn import datasets import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.datasets import load_digits digits = load_digits() # Select all 64 principal components pca = PCA(64) # project from 64 to 2 dimensions projected = pca.fit_transform(digits.data) # Obtain the explained variance for each principal component varianceExp= pca.explained_variance_ratio_ # Compute the total sum of variance totVarExp=np.cumsum(np.round(pca.explained_variance_ratio_, decimals=4)*100) # Plot the variance explained as a function of the number of principal components plt.plot(totVarExp) plt.xlabel('No of principal components') plt.ylabel('% variance explained') plt.title('No of Principal Components vs Total Variance explained') plt.savefig('fig2.png', bbox_inches='tight') ## 1.2a K-Means – R code In the code first the scatter plot of the first 2 Principal Components of the handwritten digits is plotted as a scatter plot. Over this plot 10 centroids of the 10 different clusters corresponding the 10 diferent digits is plotted over the original scatter plot. library(ggplot2) # Read the digits data digits= read.csv("digits.csv") # Create digit classes target variable digitClasses <- factor(digits$X0.000000000000000000e.00.29)

# Compute the Principal COmponents
digitsPCA=prcomp(digits[,1:64])

# Create a data frame of Principal components and the digit classes
df <- data.frame(digitsPCA$x) df1 <- cbind(df,digitClasses) # Pick only the first 2 principal components a<- df[,1:2] # Compute K Means of 10 clusters and allow for 1000 iterations k<-kmeans(a,10,1000) # Create a dataframe of the centroids of the clusters df2<-data.frame(k$centers)

#Plot the first 2 principal components with the K Means centroids
ggplot(df1,aes(x=PC1,y=PC2,col=digitClasses)) + geom_point() +
geom_point(data=df2,aes(x=PC1,y=PC2),col="black",size = 4) +
ggtitle("Top 2 Principal Components with KMeans clustering") 

## 1.2b K-Means – Python code

The centroids of the 10 different handwritten digits is plotted over the scatter plot of the first 2 principal components.

import numpy as np
from sklearn.decomposition import PCA
from sklearn import decomposition
from sklearn import datasets
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.cluster import KMeans

# Select only the 1st 2 principal components
pca = PCA(2)  # project from 64 to 2 dimensions
projected = pca.fit_transform(digits.data)

# Create 10 different clusters
kmeans = KMeans(n_clusters=10)

# Compute  the clusters
kmeans.fit(projected)
y_kmeans = kmeans.predict(projected)
# Get the cluster centroids
centers = kmeans.cluster_centers_
centers

#Create a scatter plot of the first 2 principal components
plt.scatter(projected[:, 0], projected[:, 1],
c=digits.target, edgecolor='none', alpha=0.5,
cmap=plt.cm.get_cmap('spectral', 10))
plt.xlabel('PCA 1')
plt.ylabel('PCA 2')
plt.colorbar();
# Overlay the centroids on the scatter plot
plt.scatter(centers[:, 0], centers[:, 1], c='darkblue', s=100)
plt.savefig('fig3.png', bbox_inches='tight')

## 1.3a Heirarchical clusters – R code

Herirachical clusters is another type of unsupervised learning. It successively joins the closest pair of objects (points or clusters) in succession based on some ‘distance’ metric. In this type of clustering we do not have choose the number of centroids. We can cut the created dendrogram mat an appropriate height to get a desired and reasonable number of clusters These are the following ‘distance’ metrics used while combining successive objects

• Ward
• Complete
• Single
• Average
• Centroid
# Read the IRIS dataset
iris <- datasets::iris
iris2 <- iris[,-5]
species <- iris[,5]

#Compute the distance matrix
d_iris <- dist(iris2)

# Use the 'average' method to for the clsuters
hc_iris <- hclust(d_iris, method = "average")

# Plot the clusters
plot(hc_iris)

# Cut tree into 3 groups
sub_grp <- cutree(hc_iris, k = 3)

# Number of members in each cluster
table(sub_grp)
## sub_grp
##  1  2  3
## 50 64 36
# Draw rectangles around the clusters
rect.hclust(hc_iris, k = 3, border = 2:5)

## 1.3a Heirarchical clusters – Python code

from sklearn.datasets import load_iris
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
# Load the IRIS data set

# Generate the linkage matrix using the average method

#Plot the dendrogram
#dendrogram(Z)
#plt.xlabel('Data')
#plt.ylabel('Distance')
#plt.suptitle('Samples clustering', fontweight='bold', fontsize=14);
#plt.savefig('fig4.png', bbox_inches='tight')

# Conclusion

This is the last and concluding part of my series on Practical Machine Learning with R and Python. These parallel implementations of R and Python can be used as a quick reference while working on a large project. A person who is adept in one of the languages R or Python, can quickly absorb code in the other language.

Hope you find this series useful!

More interesting things to come. Watch this space!

References

1. Statistical Learning, Prof Trevor Hastie & Prof Robert Tibesherani, Online Stanford
2. Applied Machine Learning in Python Prof Kevyn-Collin Thomson, University Of Michigan, Coursera

To see all posts see ‘Index of posts

# Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 5

This is the 5th and probably penultimate part of my series on ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python’. The earlier parts of this series included

1. Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 1 In this initial post, I touch upon univariate, multivariate, polynomial regression and KNN regression in R and Python
2.Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 2 In this post, I discuss Logistic Regression, KNN classification and cross validation error for both LOOCV and K-Fold in both R and Python
3.Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 3 This post covered ‘feature selection’ in Machine Learning. Specifically I touch best fit, forward fit, backward fit, ridge(L2 regularization) & lasso (L1 regularization). The post includes equivalent code in R and Python.
4.Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 4 In this part I discussed SVMs, Decision Trees, validation, precision recall, and roc curves

This post ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 5’ discusses regression with B-splines, natural splines, smoothing splines, generalized additive models (GAMS), bagging, random forest and boosting

As with my previous posts in this series, this post is largely based on the following 2 MOOC courses

1. Statistical Learning, Prof Trevor Hastie & Prof Robert Tibesherani, Online Stanford
2. Applied Machine Learning in Python Prof Kevyn-Collin Thomson, University Of Michigan, Coursera

You can download this R Markdown file and associated data files from Github at MachineLearning-RandPython-Part5

The content of this post and much more is now available as a compact book  on Amazon in both formats – as Paperback ($9.99) and a Kindle version($6.99/Rs449/). see ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Machine Learning in stereo

For this part I have used the data sets from UCI Machine Learning repository(Communities and Crime and Auto MPG)

## 1. Splines

When performing regression (continuous or logistic) between a target variable and a feature (or a set of features), a single polynomial for the entire range of the data set usually does not perform a good fit.Rather we would need to provide we could fit
regression curves for different section of the data set.

There are several techniques which do this for e.g. piecewise-constant functions, piecewise-linear functions, piecewise-quadratic/cubic/4th order polynomial functions etc. One such set of functions are the cubic splines which fit cubic polynomials to successive sections of the dataset. The points where the cubic splines join, are called ‘knots’.

Since each section has a different cubic spline, there could be discontinuities (or breaks) at these knots. To prevent these discontinuities ‘natural splines’ and ‘smoothing splines’ ensure that the seperate cubic functions have 2nd order continuity at these knots with the adjacent splines. 2nd order continuity implies that the value, 1st order derivative and 2nd order derivative at these knots are equal.

A cubic spline with knots $\alpha_{k}$ , k=1,2,3,..K is a piece-wise cubic polynomial with continuous derivative up to order 2 at each knot. We can write $y_{i} = \beta_{0} +\beta_{1}b_{1}(x_{i}) +\beta_{2}b_{2}(x_{i}) + .. + \beta_{K+3}b_{K+3}(x_{i}) + \epsilon_{i}$.
For each ($x{i},y{i}$), $b_{i}$ are called ‘basis’ functions, where  $b_{1}(x_{i})=x_{i}$$b_{2}(x_{i})=x_{i}^2$, $b_{3}(x_{i})=x_{i}^3$, $b_{k+3}(x_{i})=(x_{i} -\alpha_{k})^3$ where k=1,2,3… K The 1st and 2nd derivatives of cubic splines are continuous at the knots. Hence splines provide a smooth continuous fit to the data by fitting different splines to different sections of the data

## 1.1a Fit a 4th degree polynomial – R code

In the code below a non-linear function (a 4th order polynomial) is used to fit the data. Usually when we fit a single polynomial to the entire data set the tails of the fit tend to vary a lot particularly if there are fewer points at the ends. Splines help in reducing this variation at the extremities

library(dplyr)
library(ggplot2)
source('RFunctions-1.R')
df=read.csv("auto_mpg.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) # Data from UCI
df1 <- as.data.frame(sapply(df,as.numeric))
#Select specific columns
df2 <- df1 %>% dplyr::select(cylinder,displacement, horsepower,weight, acceleration, year,mpg)
auto <- df2[complete.cases(df2),]
# Fit a 4th degree polynomial
fit=lm(mpg~poly(horsepower,4),data=auto)
#Display a summary of fit
summary(fit)
##
## Call:
## lm(formula = mpg ~ poly(horsepower, 4), data = auto)
##
## Residuals:
##      Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max
## -14.8820  -2.5802  -0.1682   2.2100  16.1434
##
## Coefficients:
##                       Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
## (Intercept)            23.4459     0.2209 106.161   <2e-16 ***
## poly(horsepower, 4)1 -120.1377     4.3727 -27.475   <2e-16 ***
## poly(horsepower, 4)2   44.0895     4.3727  10.083   <2e-16 ***
## poly(horsepower, 4)3   -3.9488     4.3727  -0.903    0.367
## poly(horsepower, 4)4   -5.1878     4.3727  -1.186    0.236
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Residual standard error: 4.373 on 387 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.6893, Adjusted R-squared:  0.6861
## F-statistic: 214.7 on 4 and 387 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16
#Get the range of horsepower
hp <- range(auto$horsepower) #Create a sequence to be used for plotting hpGrid <- seq(hp[1],hp[2],by=10) #Predict for these values of horsepower. Set Standard error as TRUE pred=predict(fit,newdata=list(horsepower=hpGrid),se=TRUE) #Compute bands on either side that is 2xSE seBands=cbind(pred$fit+2*pred$se.fit,pred$fit-2*pred$se.fit) #Plot the fit with Standard Error bands plot(auto$horsepower,auto$mpg,xlim=hp,cex=.5,col="black",xlab="Horsepower", ylab="MPG", main="Polynomial of degree 4") lines(hpGrid,pred$fit,lwd=2,col="blue")
matlines(hpGrid,seBands,lwd=2,col="blue",lty=3)

## 1.1b Fit a 4th degree polynomial – Python code

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.preprocessing import PolynomialFeatures
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression
# Select columns
autoDF1=autoDF[['mpg','cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight','acceleration','year']]
# Convert all columns to numeric
autoDF2 = autoDF1.apply(pd.to_numeric, errors='coerce')

#Drop NAs
autoDF3=autoDF2.dropna()
autoDF3.shape
X=autoDF3[['horsepower']]
y=autoDF3['mpg']
#Create a polynomial of degree 4
poly = PolynomialFeatures(degree=4)
X_poly = poly.fit_transform(X)

# Fit a polynomial regression line
linreg = LinearRegression().fit(X_poly, y)
# Create a range of values
hpGrid = np.arange(np.min(X),np.max(X),10)
hp=hpGrid.reshape(-1,1)
# Transform to 4th degree
poly = PolynomialFeatures(degree=4)
hp_poly = poly.fit_transform(hp)

#Create a scatter plot
plt.scatter(X,y)
# Fit the prediction
ypred=linreg.predict(hp_poly)
plt.title("Poylnomial of degree 4")
fig2=plt.xlabel("Horsepower")
fig2=plt.ylabel("MPG")
# Draw the regression curve
plt.plot(hp,ypred,c="red")
plt.savefig('fig1.png', bbox_inches='tight')

## 1.1c Fit a B-Spline – R Code

In the code below a B- Spline is fit to data. The B-spline requires the manual selection of knots

#Splines
library(splines)
# Fit a B-spline to the data. Select knots at 60,75,100,150
fit=lm(mpg~bs(horsepower,df=6,knots=c(60,75,100,150)),data=auto)
# Use the fitted regresion to predict
pred=predict(fit,newdata=list(horsepower=hpGrid),se=T)
# Create a scatter plot
plot(auto$horsepower,auto$mpg,xlim=hp,cex=.5,col="black",xlab="Horsepower",
ylab="MPG", main="B-Spline with 4 knots")
#Draw lines with 2 Standard Errors on either side
lines(hpGrid,pred$fit,lwd=2) lines(hpGrid,pred$fit+2*pred$se,lty="dashed") lines(hpGrid,pred$fit-2*pred$se,lty="dashed") abline(v=c(60,75,100,150),lty=2,col="darkgreen") ## 1.1d Fit a Natural Spline – R Code Here a ‘Natural Spline’ is used to fit .The Natural Spline extrapolates beyond the boundary knots and the ends of the function are much more constrained than a regular spline or a global polynomoial where the ends can wag a lot more. Natural splines do not require the explicit selection of knots # There is no need to select the knots here. There is a smoothing parameter which # can be specified by the degrees of freedom 'df' parameter. The natural spline fit2=lm(mpg~ns(horsepower,df=4),data=auto) pred=predict(fit2,newdata=list(horsepower=hpGrid),se=T) plot(auto$horsepower,auto$mpg,xlim=hp,cex=.5,col="black",xlab="Horsepower", ylab="MPG", main="Natural Splines") lines(hpGrid,pred$fit,lwd=2)
lines(hpGrid,pred$fit+2*pred$se,lty="dashed")
lines(hpGrid,pred$fit-2*pred$se,lty="dashed")

## 1.1.e Fit a Smoothing Spline – R code

Here a smoothing spline is used. Smoothing splines also do not require the explicit setting of knots. We can change the ‘degrees of freedom(df)’ paramater to get the best fit

# Smoothing spline has a smoothing parameter, the degrees of freedom
# This is too wiggly
plot(auto$horsepower,auto$mpg,xlim=hp,cex=.5,col="black",xlab="Horsepower",
ylab="MPG", main="Smoothing Splines")

# Here df is set to 16. This has a lot of variance
fit=smooth.spline(auto$horsepower,auto$mpg,df=16)
lines(fit,col="red",lwd=2)

# We can use Cross Validation to allow the spline to pick the value of this smpopothing paramter. We do not need to set the degrees of freedom 'df'
fit=smooth.spline(auto$horsepower,auto$mpg,cv=TRUE)
lines(fit,col="blue",lwd=2)

## 1.1e Splines – Python

There isn’t as much treatment of splines in Python and SKLearn. I did find the LSQUnivariate, UnivariateSpline spline. The LSQUnivariate spline requires the explcit setting of knots

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from scipy.interpolate import LSQUnivariateSpline
autoDF.shape
autoDF.columns
autoDF1=autoDF[['mpg','cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight','acceleration','year']]
autoDF2 = autoDF1.apply(pd.to_numeric, errors='coerce')
auto=autoDF2.dropna()
auto=auto[['horsepower','mpg']].sort_values('horsepower')

# Set the knots manually
knots=[65,75,100,150]
# Create an array for X & y
X=np.array(auto['horsepower'])
y=np.array(auto['mpg'])
# Fit a LSQunivariate spline
s = LSQUnivariateSpline(X,y,knots)

#Plot the spline
xs = np.linspace(40,230,1000)
ys = s(xs)
plt.scatter(X, y)
plt.plot(xs, ys)
plt.savefig('fig2.png', bbox_inches='tight')


## 1.2 Generalized Additiive models (GAMs)

Generalized Additive Models (GAMs) is a really powerful ML tool.

$y_{i} = \beta_{0} + f_{1}(x_{i1}) + f_{2}(x_{i2}) + .. +f_{p}(x_{ip}) + \epsilon_{i}$

In GAMs we use a different functions for each of the variables. GAMs give a much better fit since we can choose any function for the different sections

## 1.2a Generalized Additive Models (GAMs) – R Code

The plot below show the smooth spline that is fit for each of the features horsepower, cylinder, displacement, year and acceleration. We can use any function for example loess, 4rd order polynomial etc.

library(gam)
# Fit a smoothing spline for horsepower, cyliner, displacement and acceleration
gam=gam(mpg~s(horsepower,4)+s(cylinder,5)+s(displacement,4)+s(year,4)+s(acceleration,5),data=auto)
# Display the summary of the fit. This give the significance of each of the paramwetr
# Also an ANOVA is given for each combination of the features
summary(gam)
##
## Call: gam(formula = mpg ~ s(horsepower, 4) + s(cylinder, 5) + s(displacement,
##     4) + s(year, 4) + s(acceleration, 5), data = auto)
## Deviance Residuals:
##     Min      1Q  Median      3Q     Max
## -8.3190 -1.4436 -0.0261  1.2279 12.0873
##
## (Dispersion Parameter for gaussian family taken to be 6.9943)
##
##     Null Deviance: 23818.99 on 391 degrees of freedom
## Residual Deviance: 2587.881 on 370 degrees of freedom
## AIC: 1898.282
##
## Number of Local Scoring Iterations: 3
##
## Anova for Parametric Effects
##                     Df  Sum Sq Mean Sq  F value    Pr(>F)
## s(horsepower, 4)     1 15632.8 15632.8 2235.085 < 2.2e-16 ***
## s(cylinder, 5)       1   508.2   508.2   72.666 3.958e-16 ***
## s(displacement, 4)   1   374.3   374.3   53.514 1.606e-12 ***
## s(year, 4)           1  2263.2  2263.2  323.583 < 2.2e-16 ***
## s(acceleration, 5)   1   372.4   372.4   53.246 1.809e-12 ***
## Residuals          370  2587.9     7.0
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Anova for Nonparametric Effects
##                    Npar Df Npar F     Pr(F)
## (Intercept)
## s(horsepower, 4)         3 13.825 1.453e-08 ***
## s(cylinder, 5)           3 17.668 9.712e-11 ***
## s(displacement, 4)       3 44.573 < 2.2e-16 ***
## s(year, 4)               3 23.364 7.183e-14 ***
## s(acceleration, 5)       4  3.848  0.004453 **
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
par(mfrow=c(2,3))
plot(gam,se=TRUE)

## 1.2b Generalized Additive Models (GAMs) – Python Code

I did not find the equivalent of GAMs in SKlearn in Python. There was an early prototype (2012) in Github. Looks like it is still work in progress or has probably been abandoned.

## 1.3 Tree based Machine Learning Models

Tree based Machine Learning are all based on the ‘bootstrapping’ technique. In bootstrapping given a sample of size N, we create datasets of size N by sampling this original dataset with replacement. Machine Learning models are built on the different bootstrapped samples and then averaged.

Decision Trees as seen above have the tendency to overfit. There are several techniques that help to avoid this namely a) Bagging b) Random Forests c) Boosting

### Bagging, Random Forest and Gradient Boosting

Bagging: Bagging, or Bootstrap Aggregation decreases the variance of predictions, by creating separate Decisiion Tree based ML models on the different samples and then averaging these ML models

Random Forests: Bagging is a greedy algorithm and tries to produce splits based on all variables which try to minimize the error. However the different ML models have a high correlation. Random Forests remove this shortcoming, by using a variable and random set of features to split on. Hence the features chosen and the resulting trees are uncorrelated. When these ML models are averaged the performance is much better.

Boosting: Gradient Boosted Decision Trees also use an ensemble of trees but they don’t build Machine Learning models with random set of features at each step. Rather small and simple trees are built. Successive trees try to minimize the error from the earlier trees.

Out of Bag (OOB) Error: In Random Forest and Gradient Boosting for each bootstrap sample taken from the dataset, there will be samples left out. These are known as Out of Bag samples.Classification accuracy carried out on these OOB samples is known as OOB error

## 1.31a Decision Trees – R Code

The code below creates a Decision tree with the cancer training data. The summary of the fit is output. Based on the ML model, the predict function is used on test data and a confusion matrix is output.

# Read the cancer data
library(tree)
library(caret)
library(e1071)
cancer <- cancer[,2:32]
cancer$target <- as.factor(cancer$target)
train_idx <- trainTestSplit(cancer,trainPercent=75,seed=5)
train <- cancer[train_idx, ]
test <- cancer[-train_idx, ]

# Create Decision Tree
cancerStatus=tree(target~.,train)
summary(cancerStatus)
##
## Classification tree:
## tree(formula = target ~ ., data = train)
## Variables actually used in tree construction:
## [1] "worst.perimeter"      "worst.concave.points" "area.error"
## [4] "worst.texture"        "mean.texture"         "mean.concave.points"
## Number of terminal nodes:  9
## Residual mean deviance:  0.1218 = 50.8 / 417
## Misclassification error rate: 0.02347 = 10 / 426
pred <- predict(cancerStatus,newdata=test,type="class")
confusionMatrix(pred,test$target) ## Confusion Matrix and Statistics ## ## Reference ## Prediction 0 1 ## 0 49 7 ## 1 8 78 ## ## Accuracy : 0.8944 ## 95% CI : (0.8318, 0.9397) ## No Information Rate : 0.5986 ## P-Value [Acc > NIR] : 4.641e-15 ## ## Kappa : 0.7795 ## Mcnemar's Test P-Value : 1 ## ## Sensitivity : 0.8596 ## Specificity : 0.9176 ## Pos Pred Value : 0.8750 ## Neg Pred Value : 0.9070 ## Prevalence : 0.4014 ## Detection Rate : 0.3451 ## Detection Prevalence : 0.3944 ## Balanced Accuracy : 0.8886 ## ## 'Positive' Class : 0 ##  # Plot decision tree with labels plot(cancerStatus) text(cancerStatus,pretty=0) ## 1.31b Decision Trees – Cross Validation – R Code We can also perform a Cross Validation on the data to identify the Decision Tree which will give the minimum deviance. library(tree) cancer <- read.csv("cancer.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) cancer <- cancer[,2:32] cancer$target <- as.factor(cancer$target) train_idx <- trainTestSplit(cancer,trainPercent=75,seed=5) train <- cancer[train_idx, ] test <- cancer[-train_idx, ] # Create Decision Tree cancerStatus=tree(target~.,train) # Execute 10 fold cross validation cvCancer=cv.tree(cancerStatus) plot(cvCancer) # Plot the plot(cvCancer$size,cvCancer$dev,type='b') prunedCancer=prune.tree(cancerStatus,best=4) plot(prunedCancer) text(prunedCancer,pretty=0) pred <- predict(prunedCancer,newdata=test,type="class") confusionMatrix(pred,test$target)
## Confusion Matrix and Statistics
##
##           Reference
## Prediction  0  1
##          0 50  7
##          1  7 78
##
##                Accuracy : 0.9014
##                  95% CI : (0.8401, 0.945)
##     No Information Rate : 0.5986
##     P-Value [Acc > NIR] : 7.988e-16
##
##                   Kappa : 0.7948
##  Mcnemar's Test P-Value : 1
##
##             Sensitivity : 0.8772
##             Specificity : 0.9176
##          Pos Pred Value : 0.8772
##          Neg Pred Value : 0.9176
##              Prevalence : 0.4014
##          Detection Rate : 0.3521
##    Detection Prevalence : 0.4014
##       Balanced Accuracy : 0.8974
##
##        'Positive' Class : 0
## 

## 1.31c Decision Trees – Python Code

Below is the Python code for creating Decision Trees. The accuracy, precision, recall and F1 score is computed on the test data set.

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.metrics import confusion_matrix
from sklearn import tree
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier
from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score, precision_score, recall_score, f1_score
import graphviz

(X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True)

X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X_cancer, y_cancer,
random_state = 0)
clf = DecisionTreeClassifier().fit(X_train, y_train)

print('Accuracy of Decision Tree classifier on training set: {:.2f}'
.format(clf.score(X_train, y_train)))
print('Accuracy of Decision Tree classifier on test set: {:.2f}'
.format(clf.score(X_test, y_test)))

y_predicted=clf.predict(X_test)
confusion = confusion_matrix(y_test, y_predicted)
print('Accuracy: {:.2f}'.format(accuracy_score(y_test, y_predicted)))
print('Precision: {:.2f}'.format(precision_score(y_test, y_predicted)))
print('Recall: {:.2f}'.format(recall_score(y_test, y_predicted)))
print('F1: {:.2f}'.format(f1_score(y_test, y_predicted)))

# Plot the Decision Tree
clf = DecisionTreeClassifier(max_depth=2).fit(X_train, y_train)
dot_data = tree.export_graphviz(clf, out_file=None,
feature_names=cancer.feature_names,
class_names=cancer.target_names,
filled=True, rounded=True,
special_characters=True)
graph = graphviz.Source(dot_data)
graph
## Accuracy of Decision Tree classifier on training set: 1.00
## Accuracy of Decision Tree classifier on test set: 0.87
## Accuracy: 0.87
## Precision: 0.97
## Recall: 0.82
## F1: 0.89

## 1.31d Decision Trees – Cross Validation – Python Code

In the code below 5-fold cross validation is performed for different depths of the tree and the accuracy is computed. The accuracy on the test set seems to plateau when the depth is 8. But it is seen to increase again from 10 to 12. More analysis needs to be done here


import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier
(X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True)
from sklearn.cross_validation import train_test_split, KFold
def computeCVAccuracy(X,y,folds):
accuracy=[]
foldAcc=[]
depth=[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12]
nK=len(X)/float(folds)
xval_err=0
for i in depth:
kf = KFold(len(X),n_folds=folds)
for train_index, test_index in kf:
X_train, X_test = X.iloc[train_index], X.iloc[test_index]
y_train, y_test = y.iloc[train_index], y.iloc[test_index]
clf = DecisionTreeClassifier(max_depth = i).fit(X_train, y_train)
score=clf.score(X_test, y_test)
accuracy.append(score)

foldAcc.append(np.mean(accuracy))

return(foldAcc)

cvAccuracy=computeCVAccuracy(pd.DataFrame(X_cancer),pd.DataFrame(y_cancer),folds=10)

df1=pd.DataFrame(cvAccuracy)
df1.columns=['cvAccuracy']
df=df1.reindex([1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12])
df.plot()
plt.title("Decision Tree - 10-fold Cross Validation Accuracy vs Depth of tree")
plt.xlabel("Depth of tree")
plt.ylabel("Accuracy")
plt.savefig('fig3.png', bbox_inches='tight')

## 1.4a Random Forest – R code

A Random Forest is fit using the Boston data. The summary shows that 4 variables were randomly chosen at each split and the resulting ML model explains 88.72% of the test data. Also the variable importance is plotted. It can be seen that ‘rooms’ and ‘status’ are the most influential features in the model

library(randomForest)
df=read.csv("Boston.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) # Data from MASS - SL

# Select specific columns
Boston <- df %>% dplyr::select("crimeRate","zone","indus","charles","nox","rooms","age",                          "distances","highways","tax","teacherRatio","color",
"status","medianValue")

# Fit a Random Forest on the Boston training data
rfBoston=randomForest(medianValue~.,data=Boston)
# Display the summatu of the fit. It can be seen that the MSE is 10.88
# and the percentage variance explained is 86.14%. About 4 variables were tried at each # #split for a maximum tree of 500.
# The MSE and percent variance is on Out of Bag trees
rfBoston
##
## Call:
##  randomForest(formula = medianValue ~ ., data = Boston)
##                Type of random forest: regression
##                      Number of trees: 500
## No. of variables tried at each split: 4
##
##           Mean of squared residuals: 9.521672
##                     % Var explained: 88.72
#List and plot the variable importances
importance(rfBoston)
##              IncNodePurity
## crimeRate        2602.1550
## zone              258.8057
## indus            2599.6635
## charles           240.2879
## nox              2748.8485
## rooms           12011.6178
## age              1083.3242
## distances        2432.8962
## highways          393.5599
## tax              1348.6987
## teacherRatio     2841.5151
## color             731.4387
## status          12735.4046
varImpPlot(rfBoston)

## 1.4b Random Forest-OOB and Cross Validation Error – R code

The figure below shows the OOB error and the Cross Validation error vs the ‘mtry’. Here mtry indicates the number of random features that are chosen at each split. The lowest test error occurs when mtry = 8

library(randomForest)
df=read.csv("Boston.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) # Data from MASS - SL

# Select specific columns
Boston <- df %>% dplyr::select("crimeRate","zone","indus","charles","nox","rooms","age",                          "distances","highways","tax","teacherRatio","color",
"status","medianValue")
# Split as training and tst sets
train_idx <- trainTestSplit(Boston,trainPercent=75,seed=5)
train <- Boston[train_idx, ]
test <- Boston[-train_idx, ]

#Initialize OOD and testError
oobError <- NULL
testError <- NULL
# In the code below the number of variables to consider at each split is increased
# from 1 - 13(max features) and the OOB error and the MSE is computed
for(i in 1:13){
fitRF=randomForest(medianValue~.,data=train,mtry=i,ntree=400)
oobError[i] <-fitRF$mse[400] pred <- predict(fitRF,newdata=test) testError[i] <- mean((pred-test$medianValue)^2)
}

# We can see the OOB and Test Error. It can be seen that the Random Forest performs
# best with the lowers MSE at mtry=6
matplot(1:13,cbind(testError,oobError),pch=19,col=c("red","blue"),
type="b",xlab="mtry(no of varaibles at each split)", ylab="Mean Squared Error",
main="Random Forest - OOB and Test Error")
legend("topright",legend=c("OOB","Test"),pch=19,col=c("red","blue"))

## 1.4c Random Forest – Python code

The python code for Random Forest Regression is shown below. The training and test score is computed. The variable importance shows that ‘rooms’ and ‘status’ are the most influential of the variables

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestRegressor

X=df[['crimeRate','zone', 'indus','charles','nox','rooms', 'age','distances','highways','tax',
'teacherRatio','color','status']]
y=df['medianValue']

X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, random_state = 0)

regr = RandomForestRegressor(max_depth=4, random_state=0)
regr.fit(X_train, y_train)

print('R-squared score (training): {:.3f}'
.format(regr.score(X_train, y_train)))
print('R-squared score (test): {:.3f}'
.format(regr.score(X_test, y_test)))

feature_names=['crimeRate','zone', 'indus','charles','nox','rooms', 'age','distances','highways','tax',
'teacherRatio','color','status']
print(regr.feature_importances_)
plt.figure(figsize=(10,6),dpi=80)
c_features=X_train.shape[1]
plt.barh(np.arange(c_features),regr.feature_importances_)
plt.xlabel("Feature importance")
plt.ylabel("Feature name")

plt.yticks(np.arange(c_features), feature_names)
plt.tight_layout()

plt.savefig('fig4.png', bbox_inches='tight')

## R-squared score (training): 0.917
## R-squared score (test): 0.734
## [ 0.03437382  0.          0.00580335  0.          0.00731004  0.36461548
##   0.00638577  0.03432173  0.0041244   0.01732328  0.01074148  0.0012638
##   0.51373683]

## 1.4d Random Forest – Cross Validation and OOB Error – Python code

As with R the ‘max_features’ determines the random number of features the random forest will use at each split. The plot shows that when max_features=8 the MSE is lowest

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestRegressor
from sklearn.model_selection import cross_val_score

X=df[['crimeRate','zone', 'indus','charles','nox','rooms', 'age','distances','highways','tax',
'teacherRatio','color','status']]
y=df['medianValue']

cvError=[]
oobError=[]
oobMSE=[]
for i in range(1,13):
regr = RandomForestRegressor(max_depth=4, n_estimators=400,max_features=i,oob_score=True,random_state=0)
mse= np.mean(cross_val_score(regr, X, y, cv=5,scoring = 'neg_mean_squared_error'))
# Since this is neg_mean_squared_error I have inverted the sign to get MSE
cvError.append(-mse)
# Fit on all data to compute OOB error
regr.fit(X, y)
# Record the OOB error for each max_features=i setting
oob = 1 - regr.oob_score_
oobError.append(oob)
# Get the Out of Bag prediction
oobPred=regr.oob_prediction_
# Compute the Mean Squared Error between OOB Prediction and target
mseOOB=np.mean(np.square(oobPred-y))
oobMSE.append(mseOOB)

# Plot the CV Error and OOB Error
# Set max_features
maxFeatures=np.arange(1,13)
cvError=pd.DataFrame(cvError,index=maxFeatures)
oobMSE=pd.DataFrame(oobMSE,index=maxFeatures)
#Plot
fig8=df.plot()
fig8=plt.title('Random forest - CV Error and OOB Error vs max_features')
fig8.figure.savefig('fig8.png', bbox_inches='tight')

#Plot the OOB Error vs max_features
plt.plot(range(1,13),oobError)
fig2=plt.title("Random Forest - OOB Error vs max_features (variable no of features)")
fig2=plt.xlabel("max_features (variable no of features)")
fig2=plt.ylabel("OOB Error")
fig2.figure.savefig('fig7.png', bbox_inches='tight')


## 1.5a Boosting – R code

Here a Gradient Boosted ML Model is built with a n.trees=5000, with a learning rate of 0.01 and depth of 4. The feature importance plot also shows that rooms and status are the 2 most important features. The MSE vs the number of trees plateaus around 2000 trees

library(gbm)
# Perform gradient boosting on the Boston data set. The distribution is gaussian since we
# doing MSE. The interaction depth specifies the number of splits
boostBoston=gbm(medianValue~.,data=train,distribution="gaussian",n.trees=5000,
shrinkage=0.01,interaction.depth=4)
#The summary gives the variable importance. The 2 most significant variables are
# number of rooms and lower status
summary(boostBoston)

##                       var    rel.inf
## rooms               rooms 42.2267200
## status             status 27.3024671
## distances       distances  7.9447972
## crimeRate       crimeRate  5.0238827
## nox                   nox  4.0616548
## teacherRatio teacherRatio  3.1991999
## age                   age  2.7909772
## color               color  2.3436295
## tax                   tax  2.1386213
## charles           charles  1.3799109
## highways         highways  0.7644026
## indus               indus  0.7236082
## zone                 zone  0.1001287
# The plots below show how each variable relates to the median value of the home. As
# the number of roomd increase the median value increases and with increase in lower status
# the median value decreases
par(mfrow=c(1,2))
#Plot the relation between the top 2 features and the target
plot(boostBoston,i="rooms")
plot(boostBoston,i="status")

# Create a sequence of trees between 100-5000 incremented by 50
nTrees=seq(100,5000,by=50)
# Predict the values for the test data
pred <- predict(boostBoston,newdata=test,n.trees=nTrees)
# Compute the mean for each of the MSE for each of the number of trees
boostError <- apply((pred-test$medianValue)^2,2,mean) #Plot the MSE vs the number of trees plot(nTrees,boostError,pch=19,col="blue",ylab="Mean Squared Error", main="Boosting Test Error") ## 1.5b Cross Validation Boosting – R code Included below is a cross validation error vs the learning rate. The lowest error is when learning rate = 0.09 cvError <- NULL s <- c(.001,0.01,0.03,0.05,0.07,0.09,0.1) for(i in seq_along(s)){ cvBoost=gbm(medianValue~.,data=train,distribution="gaussian",n.trees=5000, shrinkage=s[i],interaction.depth=4,cv.folds=5) cvError[i] <- mean(cvBoost$cv.error)
}

# Create a data frame for plotting
a <- rbind(s,cvError)
b <- as.data.frame(t(a))
# It can be seen that a shrinkage parameter of 0,05 gives the lowes CV Error
ggplot(b,aes(s,cvError)) + geom_point() + geom_line(color="blue") +
xlab("Shrinkage") + ylab("Cross Validation Error") +
ggtitle("Gradient boosted trees - Cross Validation error vs Shrinkage")

## 1.5c Boosting – Python code

A gradient boost ML model in Python is created below. The Rsquared score is computed on the training and test data.

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split

X=df[['crimeRate','zone', 'indus','charles','nox','rooms', 'age','distances','highways','tax',
'teacherRatio','color','status']]
y=df['medianValue']

X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, random_state = 0)

regr.fit(X_train, y_train)

print('R-squared score (training): {:.3f}'
.format(regr.score(X_train, y_train)))
print('R-squared score (test): {:.3f}'
.format(regr.score(X_test, y_test)))
## R-squared score (training): 0.983
## R-squared score (test): 0.821

## 1.5c Cross Validation Boosting – Python code

the cross validation error is computed as the learning rate is varied. The minimum CV eror occurs when lr = 0.04

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestRegressor
from sklearn.model_selection import cross_val_score

X=df[['crimeRate','zone', 'indus','charles','nox','rooms', 'age','distances','highways','tax',
'teacherRatio','color','status']]
y=df['medianValue']

cvError=[]
learning_rate =[.001,0.01,0.03,0.05,0.07,0.09,0.1]
for lr in learning_rate:
mse= np.mean(cross_val_score(regr, X, y, cv=10,scoring = 'neg_mean_squared_error'))
# Since this is neg_mean_squared_error I have inverted the sign to get MSE
cvError.append(-mse)
learning_rate =[.001,0.01,0.03,0.05,0.07,0.09,0.1]
plt.plot(learning_rate,cvError)
plt.title("Gradient Boosting - 5-fold CV- Mean Squared Error vs max_features (variable no of features)")
plt.xlabel("max_features (variable no of features)")
plt.ylabel("Mean Squared Error")
plt.savefig('fig6.png', bbox_inches='tight')

Conclusion This post covered Splines and Tree based ML models like Bagging, Random Forest and Boosting. Stay tuned for further updates.

You may also like

To see all posts see Index of posts

# Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 4

This is the 4th installment of my ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python’ series. In this part I discuss classification with Support Vector Machines (SVMs), using both a Linear and a Radial basis kernel, and Decision Trees. Further, a closer look is taken at some of the metrics associated with binary classification, namely accuracy vs precision and recall. I also touch upon Validation curves, Precision-Recall, ROC curves and AUC with equivalent code in R and Python

This post is a continuation of my 3 earlier posts on Practical Machine Learning in R and Python
1. Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 1
2. Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 2
3. Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 3

The RMarkdown file with the code and the associated data files can be downloaded from Github at MachineLearning-RandPython-Part4

The content of this post and much more is now available as a compact book  on Amazon in both formats – as Paperback ($9.99) and a Kindle version($6.99/Rs449/). see ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Machine Learning in stereo

Support Vector Machines (SVM) are another useful Machine Learning model that can be used for both regression and classification problems. SVMs used in classification, compute the hyperplane, that separates the 2 classes with the maximum margin. To do this the features may be transformed into a larger multi-dimensional feature space. SVMs can be used with different kernels namely linear, polynomial or radial basis to determine the best fitting model for a given classification problem.

In the 2nd part of this series Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 2, I had mentioned the various metrics that are used in classification ML problems namely Accuracy, Precision, Recall and F1 score. Accuracy gives the fraction of data that were correctly classified as belonging to the +ve or -ve class. However ‘accuracy’ in itself is not a good enough measure because it does not take into account the fraction of the data that were incorrectly classified. This issue becomes even more critical in different domains. For e.g a surgeon who would like to detect cancer, would like to err on the side of caution, and classify even a possibly non-cancerous patient as possibly having cancer, rather than mis-classifying a malignancy as benign. Here we would like to increase recall or sensitivity which is  given by Recall= TP/(TP+FN) or we try reduce mis-classification by either increasing the (true positives) TP or reducing (false negatives) FN

On the other hand, search algorithms would like to increase precision which tries to reduce the number of irrelevant results in the search result. Precision= TP/(TP+FP). In other words we do not want ‘false positives’ or irrelevant results to come in the search results and there is a need to reduce the false positives.

When we try to increase ‘precision’, we do so at the cost of ‘recall’, and vice-versa. I found this diagram and explanation in Wikipedia very useful Source: Wikipedia

“Consider a brain surgeon tasked with removing a cancerous tumor from a patient’s brain. The surgeon needs to remove all of the tumor cells since any remaining cancer cells will regenerate the tumor. Conversely, the surgeon must not remove healthy brain cells since that would leave the patient with impaired brain function. The surgeon may be more liberal in the area of the brain she removes to ensure she has extracted all the cancer cells. This decision increases recall but reduces precision. On the other hand, the surgeon may be more conservative in the brain she removes to ensure she extracts only cancer cells. This decision increases precision but reduces recall. That is to say, greater recall increases the chances of removing healthy cells (negative outcome) and increases the chances of removing all cancer cells (positive outcome). Greater precision decreases the chances of removing healthy cells (positive outcome) but also decreases the chances of removing all cancer cells (negative outcome).”

## 1.1a. Linear SVM – R code

In R code below I use SVM with linear kernel

source('RFunctions-1.R')
library(dplyr)
library(e1071)
library(caret)
library(reshape2)
library(ggplot2)
# Read data. Data from SKLearn
cancer$target <- as.factor(cancer$target)

# Split into training and test sets
train_idx <- trainTestSplit(cancer,trainPercent=75,seed=5)
train <- cancer[train_idx, ]
test <- cancer[-train_idx, ]

# Fit a linear basis kernel. DO not scale the data
svmfit=svm(target~., data=train, kernel="linear",scale=FALSE)
ypred=predict(svmfit,test)
#Print a confusion matrix
confusionMatrix(ypred,test$target) ## Confusion Matrix and Statistics ## ## Reference ## Prediction 0 1 ## 0 54 3 ## 1 3 82 ## ## Accuracy : 0.9577 ## 95% CI : (0.9103, 0.9843) ## No Information Rate : 0.5986 ## P-Value [Acc > NIR] : <2e-16 ## ## Kappa : 0.9121 ## Mcnemar's Test P-Value : 1 ## ## Sensitivity : 0.9474 ## Specificity : 0.9647 ## Pos Pred Value : 0.9474 ## Neg Pred Value : 0.9647 ## Prevalence : 0.4014 ## Detection Rate : 0.3803 ## Detection Prevalence : 0.4014 ## Balanced Accuracy : 0.9560 ## ## 'Positive' Class : 0 ##  ## 1.1b Linear SVM – Python code The code below creates a SVM with linear basis in Python and also dumps the corresponding classification metrics import numpy as np import pandas as pd import os import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.svm import LinearSVC from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs from sklearn.metrics import confusion_matrix from matplotlib.colors import ListedColormap from sklearn.datasets import load_breast_cancer # Load the cancer data (X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True) X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X_cancer, y_cancer, random_state = 0) clf = LinearSVC().fit(X_train, y_train) print('Breast cancer dataset') print('Accuracy of Linear SVC classifier on training set: {:.2f}' .format(clf.score(X_train, y_train))) print('Accuracy of Linear SVC classifier on test set: {:.2f}' .format(clf.score(X_test, y_test))) ## Breast cancer dataset ## Accuracy of Linear SVC classifier on training set: 0.92 ## Accuracy of Linear SVC classifier on test set: 0.94 ## 1.2 Dummy classifier Often when we perform classification tasks using any ML model namely logistic regression, SVM, neural networks etc. it is very useful to determine how well the ML model performs agains at dummy classifier. A dummy classifier uses some simple computation like frequency of majority class, instead of fitting and ML model. It is essential that our ML model does much better that the dummy classifier. This problem is even more important in imbalanced classes where we have only about 10% of +ve samples. If any ML model we create has a accuracy of about 0.90 then it is evident that our classifier is not doing any better than a dummy classsfier which can just take a majority count of this imbalanced class and also come up with 0.90. We need to be able to do better than that. In the examples below (1.3a & 1.3b) it can be seen that SVMs with ‘radial basis’ kernel with unnormalized data, for both R and Python, do not perform any better than the dummy classifier. ## 1.2a Dummy classifier – R code R does not seem to have an explicit dummy classifier. I created a simple dummy classifier that predicts the majority class. SKlearn in Python also includes other strategies like uniform, stratified etc. but this should be possible to create in R also. # Create a simple dummy classifier that computes the ratio of the majority class to the totla DummyClassifierAccuracy <- function(train,test,type="majority"){ if(type=="majority"){ count <- sum(train$target==1)/dim(train)[1]
}
count
}

cancer$target <- as.factor(cancer$target)

# Create training and test sets
train_idx <- trainTestSplit(cancer,trainPercent=75,seed=5)
train <- cancer[train_idx, ]
test <- cancer[-train_idx, ]

#Dummy classifier majority class
acc=DummyClassifierAccuracy(train,test)
sprintf("Accuracy is %f",acc)
## [1] "Accuracy is 0.638498"

## 1.2b Dummy classifier – Python code

This dummy classifier uses the majority class.

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.dummy import DummyClassifier
from sklearn.metrics import confusion_matrix
(X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True)
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X_cancer, y_cancer,
random_state = 0)

# Negative class (0) is most frequent
dummy_majority = DummyClassifier(strategy = 'most_frequent').fit(X_train, y_train)
y_dummy_predictions = dummy_majority.predict(X_test)

print('Dummy classifier accuracy on test set: {:.2f}'
.format(dummy_majority.score(X_test, y_test)))

## Dummy classifier accuracy on test set: 0.63

## 1.3a – Radial SVM (un-normalized) – R code

SVMs perform better when the data is normalized or scaled. The 2 examples below show that SVM with radial basis kernel does not perform any better than the dummy classifier

library(dplyr)
library(e1071)
library(caret)
library(reshape2)
library(ggplot2)

train_idx <- trainTestSplit(cancer,trainPercent=75,seed=5)
train <- cancer[train_idx, ]
test <- cancer[-train_idx, ]
# Unnormalized data
ypred=predict(svmfit,test)
confusionMatrix(ypred,test$target) ## Confusion Matrix and Statistics ## ## Reference ## Prediction 0 1 ## 0 0 0 ## 1 57 85 ## ## Accuracy : 0.5986 ## 95% CI : (0.5131, 0.6799) ## No Information Rate : 0.5986 ## P-Value [Acc > NIR] : 0.5363 ## ## Kappa : 0 ## Mcnemar's Test P-Value : 1.195e-13 ## ## Sensitivity : 0.0000 ## Specificity : 1.0000 ## Pos Pred Value : NaN ## Neg Pred Value : 0.5986 ## Prevalence : 0.4014 ## Detection Rate : 0.0000 ## Detection Prevalence : 0.0000 ## Balanced Accuracy : 0.5000 ## ## 'Positive' Class : 0 ##  ## 1.4b – Radial SVM (un-normalized) – Python code import numpy as np import pandas as pd import os import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.datasets import load_breast_cancer from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.svm import SVC # Load the cancer data (X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True) X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X_cancer, y_cancer, random_state = 0) clf = SVC(C=10).fit(X_train, y_train) print('Breast cancer dataset (unnormalized features)') print('Accuracy of RBF-kernel SVC on training set: {:.2f}' .format(clf.score(X_train, y_train))) print('Accuracy of RBF-kernel SVC on test set: {:.2f}' .format(clf.score(X_test, y_test))) ## Breast cancer dataset (unnormalized features) ## Accuracy of RBF-kernel SVC on training set: 1.00 ## Accuracy of RBF-kernel SVC on test set: 0.63 ## 1.5a – Radial SVM (Normalized) -R Code The data is scaled (normalized ) before using the SVM model. The SVM model has 2 paramaters a) C – Large C (less regularization), more regularization b) gamma – Small gamma has larger decision boundary with more misclassfication, and larger gamma has tighter decision boundary The R code below computes the accuracy as the regularization paramater is changed trainingAccuracy <- NULL testAccuracy <- NULL C1 <- c(.01,.1, 1, 10, 20) for(i in C1){ svmfit=svm(target~., data=train, kernel="radial",cost=i,scale=TRUE) ypredTrain <-predict(svmfit,train) ypredTest=predict(svmfit,test) a <-confusionMatrix(ypredTrain,train$target)
b <-confusionMatrix(ypredTest,test$target) trainingAccuracy <-c(trainingAccuracy,a$overall[1])
testAccuracy <-c(testAccuracy,b$overall[1]) } print(trainingAccuracy) ## Accuracy Accuracy Accuracy Accuracy Accuracy ## 0.6384977 0.9671362 0.9906103 0.9976526 1.0000000 print(testAccuracy) ## Accuracy Accuracy Accuracy Accuracy Accuracy ## 0.5985915 0.9507042 0.9647887 0.9507042 0.9507042 a <-rbind(C1,as.numeric(trainingAccuracy),as.numeric(testAccuracy)) b <- data.frame(t(a)) names(b) <- c("C1","trainingAccuracy","testAccuracy") df <- melt(b,id="C1") ggplot(df) + geom_line(aes(x=C1, y=value, colour=variable),size=2) + xlab("C (SVC regularization)value") + ylab("Accuracy") + ggtitle("Training and test accuracy vs C(regularization)") ## 1.5b – Radial SVM (normalized) – Python The Radial basis kernel is used on normalized data for a range of ‘C’ values and the result is plotted. import numpy as np import pandas as pd import os import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.datasets import load_breast_cancer from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.svm import SVC from sklearn.preprocessing import MinMaxScaler scaler = MinMaxScaler() # Load the cancer data (X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True) X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X_cancer, y_cancer, random_state = 0) X_train_scaled = scaler.fit_transform(X_train) X_test_scaled = scaler.transform(X_test) print('Breast cancer dataset (normalized with MinMax scaling)') trainingAccuracy=[] testAccuracy=[] for C1 in [.01,.1, 1, 10, 20]: clf = SVC(C=C1).fit(X_train_scaled, y_train) acctrain=clf.score(X_train_scaled, y_train) accTest=clf.score(X_test_scaled, y_test) trainingAccuracy.append(acctrain) testAccuracy.append(accTest) # Create a dataframe C1=[.01,.1, 1, 10, 20] trainingAccuracy=pd.DataFrame(trainingAccuracy,index=C1) testAccuracy=pd.DataFrame(testAccuracy,index=C1) # Plot training and test R squared as a function of alpha df=pd.concat([trainingAccuracy,testAccuracy],axis=1) df.columns=['trainingAccuracy','trainingAccuracy'] fig1=df.plot() fig1=plt.title('Training and test accuracy vs C (SVC)') fig1.figure.savefig('fig1.png', bbox_inches='tight') ## Breast cancer dataset (normalized with MinMax scaling) Output image: ## 1.6a Validation curve – R code Sklearn includes code creating validation curves by varying paramaters and computing and plotting accuracy as gamma or C or changd. I did not find this R but I think this is a useful function and so I have created the R equivalent of this. # The R equivalent of np.logspace seqLogSpace <- function(start,stop,len){ a=seq(log10(10^start),log10(10^stop),length=len) 10^a } # Read the data. This is taken the SKlearn cancer data cancer <- read.csv("cancer.csv") cancer$target <- as.factor(cancer$target) set.seed(6) # Create the range of C1 in log space param_range = seqLogSpace(-3,2,20) # Initialize the overall training and test accuracy to NULL overallTrainAccuracy <- NULL overallTestAccuracy <- NULL # Loop over the parameter range of Gamma for(i in param_range){ # Set no of folds noFolds=5 # Create the rows which fall into different folds from 1..noFolds folds = sample(1:noFolds, nrow(cancer), replace=TRUE) # Initialize the training and test accuracy of folds to 0 trainingAccuracy <- 0 testAccuracy <- 0 # Loop through the folds for(j in 1:noFolds){ # The training is all rows for which the row is != j (k-1 folds -> training) train <- cancer[folds!=j,] # The rows which have j as the index become the test set test <- cancer[folds==j,] # Create a SVM model for this svmfit=svm(target~., data=train, kernel="radial",gamma=i,scale=TRUE) # Add up all the fold accuracy for training and test separately ypredTrain <-predict(svmfit,train) ypredTest=predict(svmfit,test) # Create confusion matrix a <-confusionMatrix(ypredTrain,train$target)
b <-confusionMatrix(ypredTest,test$target) # Get the accuracy trainingAccuracy <-trainingAccuracy + a$overall[1]
testAccuracy <-testAccuracy+b$overall[1] } # Compute the average of accuracy for K folds for number of features 'i' overallTrainAccuracy=c(overallTrainAccuracy,trainingAccuracy/noFolds) overallTestAccuracy=c(overallTestAccuracy,testAccuracy/noFolds) } #Create a dataframe a <- rbind(param_range,as.numeric(overallTrainAccuracy), as.numeric(overallTestAccuracy)) b <- data.frame(t(a)) names(b) <- c("C1","trainingAccuracy","testAccuracy") df <- melt(b,id="C1") #Plot in log axis ggplot(df) + geom_line(aes(x=C1, y=value, colour=variable),size=2) + xlab("C (SVC regularization)value") + ylab("Accuracy") + ggtitle("Training and test accuracy vs C(regularization)") + scale_x_log10() ## 1.6b Validation curve – Python Compute and plot the validation curve as gamma is varied. import numpy as np import pandas as pd import os import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.datasets import load_breast_cancer from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.preprocessing import MinMaxScaler from sklearn.svm import SVC from sklearn.model_selection import validation_curve # Load the cancer data (X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True) scaler = MinMaxScaler() X_scaled = scaler.fit_transform(X_cancer) # Create a gamma values from 10^-3 to 10^2 with 20 equally spaced intervals param_range = np.logspace(-3, 2, 20) # Compute the validation curve train_scores, test_scores = validation_curve(SVC(), X_scaled, y_cancer, param_name='gamma', param_range=param_range, cv=10) #Plot the figure fig2=plt.figure() #Compute the mean train_scores_mean = np.mean(train_scores, axis=1) train_scores_std = np.std(train_scores, axis=1) test_scores_mean = np.mean(test_scores, axis=1) test_scores_std = np.std(test_scores, axis=1) fig2=plt.title('Validation Curve with SVM') fig2=plt.xlabel('$\gamma$(gamma)') fig2=plt.ylabel('Score') fig2=plt.ylim(0.0, 1.1) lw = 2 fig2=plt.semilogx(param_range, train_scores_mean, label='Training score', color='darkorange', lw=lw) fig2=plt.fill_between(param_range, train_scores_mean - train_scores_std, train_scores_mean + train_scores_std, alpha=0.2, color='darkorange', lw=lw) fig2=plt.semilogx(param_range, test_scores_mean, label='Cross-validation score', color='navy', lw=lw) fig2=plt.fill_between(param_range, test_scores_mean - test_scores_std, test_scores_mean + test_scores_std, alpha=0.2, color='navy', lw=lw) fig2.figure.savefig('fig2.png', bbox_inches='tight')  Output image: ## 1.7a Validation Curve (Preventing data leakage) – Python code In this course Applied Machine Learning in Python, the Professor states that when we apply the same data transformation to a entire dataset, it will cause a data leakage. “The proper way to do cross-validation when you need to scale the data is not to scale the entire dataset with a single transform, since this will indirectly leak information into the training data about the whole dataset, including the test data (see the lecture on data leakage later in the course). Instead, scaling/normalizing must be computed and applied for each cross-validation fold separately” So I apply separate scaling to the training and testing folds and plot. In the lecture the Prof states that this can be done using pipelines. import numpy as np import pandas as pd import os import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.datasets import load_breast_cancer from sklearn.cross_validation import KFold from sklearn.preprocessing import MinMaxScaler from sklearn.svm import SVC # Read the data (X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True) # Set the parameter range param_range = np.logspace(-3, 2, 20) # Set number of folds folds=5 #Initialize overallTrainAccuracy=[] overallTestAccuracy=[] # Loop over the paramater range for c in param_range: trainingAccuracy=0 testAccuracy=0 kf = KFold(len(X_cancer),n_folds=folds) # Partition into training and test folds for train_index, test_index in kf: # Partition the data acccording the fold indices generated X_train, X_test = X_cancer[train_index], X_cancer[test_index] y_train, y_test = y_cancer[train_index], y_cancer[test_index] # Scale the X_train and X_test scaler = MinMaxScaler() X_train_scaled = scaler.fit_transform(X_train) X_test_scaled = scaler.transform(X_test) # Fit a SVC model for each C clf = SVC(C=c).fit(X_train_scaled, y_train) #Compute the training and test score acctrain=clf.score(X_train_scaled, y_train) accTest=clf.score(X_test_scaled, y_test) trainingAccuracy += np.sum(acctrain) testAccuracy += np.sum(accTest) # Compute the mean training and testing accuracy overallTrainAccuracy.append(trainingAccuracy/folds) overallTestAccuracy.append(testAccuracy/folds) overallTrainAccuracy=pd.DataFrame(overallTrainAccuracy,index=param_range) overallTestAccuracy=pd.DataFrame(overallTestAccuracy,index=param_range) # Plot training and test R squared as a function of alpha df=pd.concat([overallTrainAccuracy,overallTestAccuracy],axis=1) df.columns=['trainingAccuracy','testAccuracy'] fig3=plt.title('Validation Curve with SVM') fig3=plt.xlabel('$\gamma$(gamma)') fig3=plt.ylabel('Score') fig3=plt.ylim(0.5, 1.1) lw = 2 fig3=plt.semilogx(param_range, overallTrainAccuracy, label='Training score', color='darkorange', lw=lw) fig3=plt.semilogx(param_range, overallTestAccuracy, label='Cross-validation score', color='navy', lw=lw) fig3=plt.legend(loc='best') fig3.figure.savefig('fig3.png', bbox_inches='tight')  Output image: ## 1.8 a Decision trees – R code Decision trees in R can be plotted using RPart package library(rpart) library(rpart.plot) rpart = NULL # Create a decision tree m <-rpart(Species~.,data=iris) #Plot rpart.plot(m,extra=2,main="Decision Tree - IRIS") ## 1.8 b Decision trees – Python code from sklearn.datasets import load_iris from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier from sklearn import tree from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split import graphviz iris = load_iris() X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(iris.data, iris.target, random_state = 3) clf = DecisionTreeClassifier().fit(X_train, y_train) print('Accuracy of Decision Tree classifier on training set: {:.2f}' .format(clf.score(X_train, y_train))) print('Accuracy of Decision Tree classifier on test set: {:.2f}' .format(clf.score(X_test, y_test))) dot_data = tree.export_graphviz(clf, out_file=None, feature_names=iris.feature_names, class_names=iris.target_names, filled=True, rounded=True, special_characters=True) graph = graphviz.Source(dot_data) graph ## Accuracy of Decision Tree classifier on training set: 1.00 ## Accuracy of Decision Tree classifier on test set: 0.97 ## 1.9a Feature importance – R code I found the following code which had a snippet for feature importance. Sklean has a nice method for this. For some reason the results in R and Python are different. Any thoughts? set.seed(3) # load the library library(mlbench) library(caret) # load the dataset cancer <- read.csv("cancer.csv") cancer$target <- as.factor(cancer$target) # Split as data data <- cancer[,1:31] target <- cancer[,32] # Train the model model <- train(data, target, method="rf", preProcess="scale", trControl=trainControl(method = "cv")) # Compute variable importance importance <- varImp(model) # summarize importance print(importance) # plot importance plot(importance) ## 1.9b Feature importance – Python code import numpy as np import pandas as pd import os import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.datasets import load_breast_cancer import numpy as np # Read the data cancer= load_breast_cancer() (X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True) X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X_cancer, y_cancer, random_state = 0) # Use the DecisionTreClassifier clf = DecisionTreeClassifier(max_depth = 4, min_samples_leaf = 8, random_state = 0).fit(X_train, y_train) c_features=len(cancer.feature_names) print('Breast cancer dataset: decision tree') print('Accuracy of DT classifier on training set: {:.2f}' .format(clf.score(X_train, y_train))) print('Accuracy of DT classifier on test set: {:.2f}' .format(clf.score(X_test, y_test))) # Plot the feature importances fig4=plt.figure(figsize=(10,6),dpi=80) fig4=plt.barh(range(c_features), clf.feature_importances_) fig4=plt.xlabel("Feature importance") fig4=plt.ylabel("Feature name") fig4=plt.yticks(np.arange(c_features), cancer.feature_names) fig4=plt.tight_layout() plt.savefig('fig4.png', bbox_inches='tight')  ## Breast cancer dataset: decision tree ## Accuracy of DT classifier on training set: 0.96 ## Accuracy of DT classifier on test set: 0.94 Output image: ## 1.10a Precision-Recall, ROC curves & AUC- R code I tried several R packages for plotting the Precision and Recall and AUC curve. PRROC seems to work well. The Precision-Recall curves show the tradeoff between precision and recall. The higher the precision, the lower the recall and vice versa.AUC curves that hug the top left corner indicate a high sensitivity,specificity and an excellent accuracy. source("RFunctions-1.R") library(dplyr) library(caret) library(e1071) library(PRROC) # Read the data (this data is from sklearn!) d <- read.csv("digits.csv") digits <- d[2:66] digits$X64 <- as.factor(digits$X64) # Split as training and test sets train_idx <- trainTestSplit(digits,trainPercent=75,seed=5) train <- digits[train_idx, ] test <- digits[-train_idx, ] # Fit a SVM model with linear basis kernel with probabilities svmfit=svm(X64~., data=train, kernel="linear",scale=FALSE,probability=TRUE) ypred=predict(svmfit,test,probability=TRUE) head(attr(ypred,"probabilities")) ## 0 1 ## 6 7.395947e-01 2.604053e-01 ## 8 9.999998e-01 1.842555e-07 ## 12 1.655178e-05 9.999834e-01 ## 13 9.649997e-01 3.500032e-02 ## 15 9.994849e-01 5.150612e-04 ## 16 9.999987e-01 1.280700e-06 # Store the probability of 0s and 1s m0<-attr(ypred,"probabilities")[,1] m1<-attr(ypred,"probabilities")[,2] # Create a dataframe of scores scores <- data.frame(m1,test$X64)

# Class 0 is data points of +ve class (in this case, digit 1) and -ve class (digit 0)
#Compute Precision Recall
pr <- pr.curve(scores.class0=scores[scores$test.X64=="1",]$m1,
scores.class1=scores[scores$test.X64=="0",]$m1,
curve=T)

# Plot precision-recall curve
plot(pr)

#Plot the ROC curve
roc<-roc.curve(m0, m1,curve=TRUE)
plot(roc)

## 1.10b Precision-Recall, ROC curves & AUC- Python code

For Python Logistic Regression is used to plot Precision Recall, ROC curve and compute AUC

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.linear_model import LogisticRegression
from sklearn.metrics import precision_recall_curve
from sklearn.metrics import roc_curve, auc
X, y = dataset.data, dataset.target
#Create 2 classes -i) Digit 1 (from digit 1) ii) Digit 0 (from all other digits)
# Make a copy of the target
z= y.copy()
# Replace all non 1's as 0
z[z != 1] = 0

X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, z, random_state=0)
# Fit a LR model
lr = LogisticRegression().fit(X_train, y_train)

#Compute the decision scores
y_scores_lr = lr.fit(X_train, y_train).decision_function(X_test)
y_score_list = list(zip(y_test[0:20], y_scores_lr[0:20]))

#Show the decision_function scores for first 20 instances
y_score_list

precision, recall, thresholds = precision_recall_curve(y_test, y_scores_lr)
closest_zero = np.argmin(np.abs(thresholds))
closest_zero_p = precision[closest_zero]
closest_zero_r = recall[closest_zero]
#Plot
plt.figure()
plt.xlim([0.0, 1.01])
plt.ylim([0.0, 1.01])
plt.plot(precision, recall, label='Precision-Recall Curve')
plt.plot(closest_zero_p, closest_zero_r, 'o', markersize = 12, fillstyle = 'none', c='r', mew=3)
plt.xlabel('Precision', fontsize=16)
plt.ylabel('Recall', fontsize=16)
plt.axes().set_aspect('equal')
plt.savefig('fig5.png', bbox_inches='tight')

#Compute and plot the ROC
y_score_lr = lr.fit(X_train, y_train).decision_function(X_test)
fpr_lr, tpr_lr, _ = roc_curve(y_test, y_score_lr)
roc_auc_lr = auc(fpr_lr, tpr_lr)

plt.figure()
plt.xlim([-0.01, 1.00])
plt.ylim([-0.01, 1.01])
plt.plot(fpr_lr, tpr_lr, lw=3, label='LogRegr ROC curve (area = {:0.2f})'.format(roc_auc_lr))
plt.xlabel('False Positive Rate', fontsize=16)
plt.ylabel('True Positive Rate', fontsize=16)
plt.title('ROC curve (1-of-10 digits classifier)', fontsize=16)
plt.legend(loc='lower right', fontsize=13)
plt.plot([0, 1], [0, 1], color='navy', lw=3, linestyle='--')
plt.axes()
plt.savefig('fig6.png', bbox_inches='tight')


output

## 1.10c Precision-Recall, ROC curves & AUC- Python code

In the code below classification probabilities are used to compute and plot precision-recall, roc and AUC

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.svm import LinearSVC
from sklearn.calibration import CalibratedClassifierCV

X, y = dataset.data, dataset.target
# Make a copy of the target
z= y.copy()
# Replace all non 1's as 0
z[z != 1] = 0

X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, z, random_state=0)
svm = LinearSVC()
# Need to use CalibratedClassifierSVC to redict probabilities for lInearSVC
clf = CalibratedClassifierCV(svm)
clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
y_proba_lr = clf.predict_proba(X_test)
from sklearn.metrics import precision_recall_curve

precision, recall, thresholds = precision_recall_curve(y_test, y_proba_lr[:,1])
closest_zero = np.argmin(np.abs(thresholds))
closest_zero_p = precision[closest_zero]
closest_zero_r = recall[closest_zero]
#plt.figure(figsize=(15,15),dpi=80)
plt.figure()
plt.xlim([0.0, 1.01])
plt.ylim([0.0, 1.01])
plt.plot(precision, recall, label='Precision-Recall Curve')
plt.plot(closest_zero_p, closest_zero_r, 'o', markersize = 12, fillstyle = 'none', c='r', mew=3)
plt.xlabel('Precision', fontsize=16)
plt.ylabel('Recall', fontsize=16)
plt.axes().set_aspect('equal')
plt.savefig('fig7.png', bbox_inches='tight')

# Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 2

In this 2nd part of the series “Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 2”, I continue where I left off in my first post Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Part 2. In this post I cover the some classification algorithmns and cross validation. Specifically I touch
-Logistic Regression
-K Nearest Neighbors (KNN) classification
-Leave out one Cross Validation (LOOCV)
-K Fold Cross Validation
in both R and Python.

As in my initial post the algorithms are based on the following courses.

You can download this R Markdown file along with the data from Github. I hope these posts can be used as a quick reference in R and Python and Machine Learning.I have tried to include the coolest part of either course in this post.

The content of this post and much more is now available as a compact book  on Amazon in both formats – as Paperback ($9.99) and a Kindle version($6.99/Rs449/). see ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Machine Learning in stereo

The following classification problem is based on Logistic Regression. The data is an included data set in Scikit-Learn, which I have saved as csv and use it also for R. The fit of a classification Machine Learning Model depends on how correctly classifies the data. There are several measures of testing a model’s classification performance. They are

Accuracy = TP + TN / (TP + TN + FP + FN) – Fraction of all classes correctly classified
Precision = TP / (TP + FP) – Fraction of correctly classified positives among those classified as positive
Recall = TP / (TP + FN) Also known as sensitivity, or True Positive Rate (True positive) – Fraction of correctly classified as positive among all positives in the data
F1 = 2 * Precision * Recall / (Precision + Recall)

## 1a. Logistic Regression – R code

The caret and e1071 package is required for using the confusionMatrix call

source("RFunctions.R")
library(dplyr)
library(caret)
library(e1071)
# Read the data (from sklearn)
# Rename the target variable
names(cancer) <- c(seq(1,30),"output")
# Split as training and test sets
train_idx <- trainTestSplit(cancer,trainPercent=75,seed=5)
train <- cancer[train_idx, ]
test <- cancer[-train_idx, ]

# Fit a generalized linear logistic model,
fit=glm(output~.,family=binomial,data=train,control = list(maxit = 50))
# Predict the output from the model
a=predict(fit,newdata=train,type="response")
# Set response >0.5 as 1 and <=0.5 as 0
b=ifelse(a>0.5,1,0)
# Compute the confusion matrix for training data
confusionMatrix(b,train$output) ## Confusion Matrix and Statistics ## ## Reference ## Prediction 0 1 ## 0 154 0 ## 1 0 272 ## ## Accuracy : 1 ## 95% CI : (0.9914, 1) ## No Information Rate : 0.6385 ## P-Value [Acc > NIR] : < 2.2e-16 ## ## Kappa : 1 ## Mcnemar's Test P-Value : NA ## ## Sensitivity : 1.0000 ## Specificity : 1.0000 ## Pos Pred Value : 1.0000 ## Neg Pred Value : 1.0000 ## Prevalence : 0.3615 ## Detection Rate : 0.3615 ## Detection Prevalence : 0.3615 ## Balanced Accuracy : 1.0000 ## ## 'Positive' Class : 0 ##  m=predict(fit,newdata=test,type="response") n=ifelse(m>0.5,1,0) # Compute the confusion matrix for test output confusionMatrix(n,test$output)
## Confusion Matrix and Statistics
##
##           Reference
## Prediction  0  1
##          0 52  4
##          1  5 81
##
##                Accuracy : 0.9366
##                  95% CI : (0.8831, 0.9706)
##     No Information Rate : 0.5986
##     P-Value [Acc > NIR] : <2e-16
##
##                   Kappa : 0.8677
##  Mcnemar's Test P-Value : 1
##
##             Sensitivity : 0.9123
##             Specificity : 0.9529
##          Pos Pred Value : 0.9286
##          Neg Pred Value : 0.9419
##              Prevalence : 0.4014
##          Detection Rate : 0.3662
##    Detection Prevalence : 0.3944
##       Balanced Accuracy : 0.9326
##
##        'Positive' Class : 0
## 

## 1b. Logistic Regression – Python code

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.linear_model import LogisticRegression
os.chdir("C:\\Users\\Ganesh\\RandPython")
from sklearn.datasets import make_classification, make_blobs

from sklearn.metrics import confusion_matrix
from matplotlib.colors import ListedColormap
(X_cancer, y_cancer) = load_breast_cancer(return_X_y = True)
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X_cancer, y_cancer,
random_state = 0)
# Call the Logisitic Regression function
clf = LogisticRegression().fit(X_train, y_train)
fig, subaxes = plt.subplots(1, 1, figsize=(7, 5))
# Fit a model
clf = LogisticRegression().fit(X_train, y_train)

# Compute and print the Accuray scores
print('Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on training set: {:.2f}'
.format(clf.score(X_train, y_train)))
print('Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on test set: {:.2f}'
.format(clf.score(X_test, y_test)))
y_predicted=clf.predict(X_test)
# Compute and print confusion matrix
confusion = confusion_matrix(y_test, y_predicted)
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score, precision_score, recall_score, f1_score
print('Accuracy: {:.2f}'.format(accuracy_score(y_test, y_predicted)))
print('Precision: {:.2f}'.format(precision_score(y_test, y_predicted)))
print('Recall: {:.2f}'.format(recall_score(y_test, y_predicted)))
print('F1: {:.2f}'.format(f1_score(y_test, y_predicted)))
## Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on training set: 0.96
## Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on test set: 0.96
## Accuracy: 0.96
## Precision: 0.99
## Recall: 0.94
## F1: 0.97

## 2. Dummy variables

The following R and Python code show how dummy variables are handled in R and Python. Dummy variables are categorival variables which have to be converted into appropriate values before using them in Machine Learning Model For e.g. if we had currency as ‘dollar’, ‘rupee’ and ‘yen’ then the dummy variable will convert this as
dollar 0 0 0
rupee 0 0 1
yen 0 1 0

## 2a. Logistic Regression with dummy variables- R code

# Load the dummies library
library(dummies) 
df <- read.csv("adult1.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE,na.strings = c(""," "," ?"))

# Remove rows which have NA
df1 <- df[complete.cases(df),]
dim(df1)
## [1] 30161    16
# Select specific columns
capital.loss,hours.per.week,native.country,salary)
# Set the dummy data with appropriate values

#Split as training and test

# Fit a binomial logistic regression
fit=glm(salary~.,family=binomial,data=train)
# Predict response
a=predict(fit,newdata=train,type="response")
# If response >0.5 then it is a 1 and 0 otherwise
b=ifelse(a>0.5,1,0)
confusionMatrix(b,train$salary) ## Confusion Matrix and Statistics ## ## Reference ## Prediction 0 1 ## 0 16065 3145 ## 1 968 2442 ## ## Accuracy : 0.8182 ## 95% CI : (0.8131, 0.8232) ## No Information Rate : 0.753 ## P-Value [Acc > NIR] : < 2.2e-16 ## ## Kappa : 0.4375 ## Mcnemar's Test P-Value : < 2.2e-16 ## ## Sensitivity : 0.9432 ## Specificity : 0.4371 ## Pos Pred Value : 0.8363 ## Neg Pred Value : 0.7161 ## Prevalence : 0.7530 ## Detection Rate : 0.7102 ## Detection Prevalence : 0.8492 ## Balanced Accuracy : 0.6901 ## ## 'Positive' Class : 0 ##  # Compute and display confusion matrix m=predict(fit,newdata=test,type="response") ## Warning in predict.lm(object, newdata, se.fit, scale = 1, type = ## ifelse(type == : prediction from a rank-deficient fit may be misleading n=ifelse(m>0.5,1,0) confusionMatrix(n,test$salary)
## Confusion Matrix and Statistics
##
##           Reference
## Prediction    0    1
##          0 5263 1099
##          1  357  822
##
##                Accuracy : 0.8069
##                  95% CI : (0.7978, 0.8158)
##     No Information Rate : 0.7453
##     P-Value [Acc > NIR] : < 2.2e-16
##
##                   Kappa : 0.4174
##  Mcnemar's Test P-Value : < 2.2e-16
##
##             Sensitivity : 0.9365
##             Specificity : 0.4279
##          Pos Pred Value : 0.8273
##          Neg Pred Value : 0.6972
##              Prevalence : 0.7453
##          Detection Rate : 0.6979
##    Detection Prevalence : 0.8437
##       Balanced Accuracy : 0.6822
##
##        'Positive' Class : 0
## 

## 2b. Logistic Regression with dummy variables- Python code

Pandas has a get_dummies function for handling dummies

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.linear_model import LogisticRegression
from sklearn.metrics import confusion_matrix
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score, precision_score, recall_score, f1_score
# Drop rows with NA
df1=df.dropna()
print(df1.shape)
# Select specific columns
'hours-per-week','native-country','salary']]

'hours-per-week','native-country']]
# Set approporiate values for dummy variables

random_state = 0)

# Compute and display Accuracy and Confusion matrix
print('Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on training set: {:.2f}'
print('Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on test set: {:.2f}'
confusion = confusion_matrix(y_test, y_predicted)
print('Accuracy: {:.2f}'.format(accuracy_score(y_test, y_predicted)))
print('Precision: {:.2f}'.format(precision_score(y_test, y_predicted)))
print('Recall: {:.2f}'.format(recall_score(y_test, y_predicted)))
print('F1: {:.2f}'.format(f1_score(y_test, y_predicted)))
## (30161, 16)
## Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on training set: 0.82
## Accuracy of Logistic regression classifier on test set: 0.81
## Accuracy: 0.81
## Precision: 0.68
## Recall: 0.41
## F1: 0.51

## 3a – K Nearest Neighbors Classification – R code

The Adult data set is taken from UCI Machine Learning Repository

source("RFunctions.R")
# Remove rows which have NA
df1 <- df[complete.cases(df),]
dim(df1)
## [1] 30161    16
# Select specific columns
capital.loss,hours.per.week,native.country,salary)
# Set dummy variables

#Split train and test as required by KNN classsification model
train.X <- train[,1:76]
train.y <- train[,77]
test.X <- test[,1:76]
test.y <- test[,77]

# Fit a model for 1,3,5,10 and 15 neighbors
cMat <- NULL
neighbors <-c(1,3,5,10,15)
for(i in seq_along(neighbors)){
fit =knn(train.X,test.X,train.y,k=i)
table(fit,test.y)
a<-confusionMatrix(fit,test.y)
cMat[i] <- a$overall[1] print(a$overall[1])
}
##  Accuracy
## 0.7835831
##  Accuracy
## 0.8162047
##  Accuracy
## 0.8089113
##  Accuracy
## 0.8209787
##  Accuracy
## 0.8184591
#Plot the Accuracy for each of the KNN models
df <- data.frame(neighbors,Accuracy=cMat)
ggplot(df,aes(x=neighbors,y=Accuracy)) + geom_point() +geom_line(color="blue") +
xlab("Number of neighbors") + ylab("Accuracy") +
ggtitle("KNN regression - Accuracy vs Number of Neighors (Unnormalized)")

## 3b – K Nearest Neighbors Classification – Python code

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.metrics import confusion_matrix
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score, precision_score, recall_score, f1_score
from sklearn.neighbors import KNeighborsClassifier
from sklearn.preprocessing import MinMaxScaler

df1=df.dropna()
print(df1.shape)
# Select specific columns
'hours-per-week','native-country','salary']]

'hours-per-week','native-country']]

#Set values for dummy variables

random_state = 0)

# KNN classification in Python requires the data to be scaled.
# Scale the data
scaler = MinMaxScaler()
# Apply scaling to test set also
# Compute the KNN model for 1,3,5,10 & 15 neighbors
accuracy=[]
neighbors=[1,3,5,10,15]
for i in neighbors:
knn = KNeighborsClassifier(n_neighbors = i)
knn.fit(X_train_scaled, y_train)
accuracy.append(knn.score(X_test_scaled, y_test))
print('Accuracy test score: {:.3f}'
.format(knn.score(X_test_scaled, y_test)))

# Plot the models with the Accuracy attained for each of these models
fig1=plt.plot(neighbors,accuracy)
fig1=plt.title("KNN regression - Accuracy vs Number of neighbors")
fig1=plt.xlabel("Neighbors")
fig1=plt.ylabel("Accuracy")
fig1.figure.savefig('foo1.png', bbox_inches='tight')
## (30161, 16)
## Accuracy test score: 0.749
## Accuracy test score: 0.779
## Accuracy test score: 0.793
## Accuracy test score: 0.804
## Accuracy test score: 0.803

Output image:

## 4 MPG vs Horsepower

The following scatter plot shows the non-linear relation between mpg and horsepower. This will be used as the data input for computing K Fold Cross Validation Error

## 4a MPG vs Horsepower scatter plot – R Code

df=read.csv("auto_mpg.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) # Data from UCI
df1 <- as.data.frame(sapply(df,as.numeric))
df2 <- df1 %>% dplyr::select(cylinder,displacement, horsepower,weight, acceleration, year,mpg)
df3 <- df2[complete.cases(df2),]
ggplot(df3,aes(x=horsepower,y=mpg)) + geom_point() + xlab("Horsepower") +
ylab("Miles Per gallon") + ggtitle("Miles per Gallon vs Hosrsepower")

## 4b MPG vs Horsepower scatter plot – Python Code

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
autoDF.shape
autoDF.columns
autoDF1=autoDF[['mpg','cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight','acceleration','year']]
autoDF2 = autoDF1.apply(pd.to_numeric, errors='coerce')
autoDF3=autoDF2.dropna()
autoDF3.shape
#X=autoDF3[['cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight']]
X=autoDF3[['horsepower']]
y=autoDF3['mpg']

fig11=plt.scatter(X,y)
fig11=plt.title("KNN regression - Accuracy vs Number of neighbors")
fig11=plt.xlabel("Neighbors")
fig11=plt.ylabel("Accuracy")
fig11.figure.savefig('foo11.png', bbox_inches='tight')


## 5 K Fold Cross Validation

K Fold Cross Validation is a technique in which the data set is divided into K Folds or K partitions. The Machine Learning model is trained on K-1 folds and tested on the Kth fold i.e.
we will have K-1 folds for training data and 1 for testing the ML model. Since we can partition this as $C_{1}^{K}$ or K choose 1, there will be K such partitions. The K Fold Cross
Validation estimates the average validation error that we can expect on a new unseen test data.

The formula for K Fold Cross validation is as follows

$MSE_{K} = \frac{\sum (y-yhat)^{2}}{n_{K}}$
and
$n_{K} = \frac{N}{K}$
and
$CV_{K} = \sum_{K=1}^{K} (\frac{n_{K}}{N}) MSE_{K}$

where $n_{K}$ is the number of elements in partition ‘K’ and N is the total number of elements
$CV_{K} =\sum_{K=1}^{K} MSE_{K}$

$CV_{K} =\frac{\sum_{K=1}^{K} MSE_{K}}{K}$
Leave Out one Cross Validation (LOOCV) is a special case of K Fold Cross Validation where N-1 data points are used to train the model and 1 data point is used to test the model. There are N such paritions of N-1 & 1 that are possible. The mean error is measured The Cross Valifation Error for LOOCV is

$CV_{N} = \frac{1}{n} *\frac{\sum_{1}^{n}(y-yhat)^{2}}{1-h_{i}}$
where $h_{i}$ is the diagonal hat matrix

see [Statistical Learning]

The above formula is also included in this blog post

It took me a day and a half to implement the K Fold Cross Validation formula. I think it is correct. In any case do let me know if you think it is off

## 5a. Leave out one cross validation (LOOCV) – R Code

R uses the package ‘boot’ for performing Cross Validation error computation

library(boot)
library(reshape2)
df=read.csv("auto_mpg.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) # Data from UCI
df1 <- as.data.frame(sapply(df,as.numeric))
# Select complete cases
df2 <- df1 %>% dplyr::select(cylinder,displacement, horsepower,weight, acceleration, year,mpg)
df3 <- df2[complete.cases(df2),]
set.seed(17)
cv.error=rep(0,10)
# For polynomials 1,2,3... 10 fit a LOOCV model
for (i in 1:10){
glm.fit=glm(mpg~poly(horsepower,i),data=df3)
cv.error[i]=cv.glm(df3,glm.fit)$delta[1] } cv.error ## [1] 24.23151 19.24821 19.33498 19.42443 19.03321 18.97864 18.83305 ## [8] 18.96115 19.06863 19.49093 # Create and display a plot folds <- seq(1,10) df <- data.frame(folds,cvError=cv.error) ggplot(df,aes(x=folds,y=cvError)) + geom_point() +geom_line(color="blue") + xlab("Degree of Polynomial") + ylab("Cross Validation Error") + ggtitle("Leave one out Cross Validation - Cross Validation Error vs Degree of Polynomial") ## 5b. Leave out one cross validation (LOOCV) – Python Code In Python there is no available function to compute Cross Validation error and we have to compute the above formula. I have done this after several hours. I think it is now in reasonable shape. Do let me know if you think otherwise. For LOOCV I use the K Fold Cross Validation with K=N import numpy as np import pandas as pd import os import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression from sklearn.cross_validation import train_test_split, KFold from sklearn.preprocessing import PolynomialFeatures from sklearn.metrics import mean_squared_error # Read data autoDF =pd.read_csv("auto_mpg.csv",encoding="ISO-8859-1") autoDF.shape autoDF.columns autoDF1=autoDF[['mpg','cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight','acceleration','year']] autoDF2 = autoDF1.apply(pd.to_numeric, errors='coerce') # Remove rows with NAs autoDF3=autoDF2.dropna() autoDF3.shape X=autoDF3[['horsepower']] y=autoDF3['mpg'] # For polynomial degree 1,2,3... 10 def computeCVError(X,y,folds): deg=[] mse=[] degree1=[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10] nK=len(X)/float(folds) xval_err=0 # For degree 'j' for j in degree1: # Split as 'folds' kf = KFold(len(X),n_folds=folds) for train_index, test_index in kf: # Create the appropriate train and test partitions from the fold index X_train, X_test = X.iloc[train_index], X.iloc[test_index] y_train, y_test = y.iloc[train_index], y.iloc[test_index] # For the polynomial degree 'j' poly = PolynomialFeatures(degree=j) # Transform the X_train and X_test X_train_poly = poly.fit_transform(X_train) X_test_poly = poly.fit_transform(X_test) # Fit a model on the transformed data linreg = LinearRegression().fit(X_train_poly, y_train) # Compute yhat or ypred y_pred = linreg.predict(X_test_poly) # Compute MSE * n_K/N test_mse = mean_squared_error(y_test, y_pred)*float(len(X_train))/float(len(X)) # Add the test_mse for this partition of the data mse.append(test_mse) # Compute the mean of all folds for degree 'j' deg.append(np.mean(mse)) return(deg) df=pd.DataFrame() print(len(X)) # Call the function once. For LOOCV K=N. hence len(X) is passed as number of folds cvError=computeCVError(X,y,len(X)) # Create and plot LOOCV df=pd.DataFrame(cvError) fig3=df.plot() fig3=plt.title("Leave one out Cross Validation - Cross Validation Error vs Degree of Polynomial") fig3=plt.xlabel("Degree of Polynomial") fig3=plt.ylabel("Cross validation Error") fig3.figure.savefig('foo3.png', bbox_inches='tight') ## 6a K Fold Cross Validation – R code Here K Fold Cross Validation is done for 4, 5 and 10 folds using the R package boot and the glm package library(boot) library(reshape2) set.seed(17) #Read data df=read.csv("auto_mpg.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) # Data from UCI df1 <- as.data.frame(sapply(df,as.numeric)) df2 <- df1 %>% dplyr::select(cylinder,displacement, horsepower,weight, acceleration, year,mpg) df3 <- df2[complete.cases(df2),] a=matrix(rep(0,30),nrow=3,ncol=10) set.seed(17) # Set the folds as 4,5 and 10 folds<-c(4,5,10) for(i in seq_along(folds)){ cv.error.10=rep(0,10) for (j in 1:10){ # Fit a generalized linear model glm.fit=glm(mpg~poly(horsepower,j),data=df3) # Compute K Fold Validation error a[i,j]=cv.glm(df3,glm.fit,K=folds[i])$delta[1]

}

}

# Create and display the K Fold Cross Validation Error
b <- t(a)
df <- data.frame(b)
df1 <- cbind(seq(1,10),df)
names(df1) <- c("PolynomialDegree","4-fold","5-fold","10-fold")

df2 <- melt(df1,id="PolynomialDegree")
ggplot(df2) + geom_line(aes(x=PolynomialDegree, y=value, colour=variable),size=2) +
xlab("Degree of Polynomial") + ylab("Cross Validation Error") +
ggtitle("K Fold Cross Validation - Cross Validation Error vs Degree of Polynomial")

## 6b. K Fold Cross Validation – Python code

The implementation of K-Fold Cross Validation Error has to be implemented and I have done this below. There is a small discrepancy in the shapes of the curves with the R plot above. Not sure why!

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression
from sklearn.cross_validation import train_test_split, KFold
from sklearn.preprocessing import PolynomialFeatures
from sklearn.metrics import mean_squared_error
autoDF.shape
autoDF.columns
autoDF1=autoDF[['mpg','cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight','acceleration','year']]
autoDF2 = autoDF1.apply(pd.to_numeric, errors='coerce')
# Drop NA rows
autoDF3=autoDF2.dropna()
autoDF3.shape
#X=autoDF3[['cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight']]
X=autoDF3[['horsepower']]
y=autoDF3['mpg']

# Create Cross Validation function
def computeCVError(X,y,folds):
deg=[]
mse=[]
# For degree 1,2,3,..10
degree1=[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]

nK=len(X)/float(folds)
xval_err=0
for j in degree1:
# Split the data into 'folds'
kf = KFold(len(X),n_folds=folds)
for train_index, test_index in kf:
# Partition the data acccording the fold indices generated
X_train, X_test = X.iloc[train_index], X.iloc[test_index]
y_train, y_test = y.iloc[train_index], y.iloc[test_index]

# Scale the X_train and X_test as per the polynomial degree 'j'
poly = PolynomialFeatures(degree=j)
X_train_poly = poly.fit_transform(X_train)
X_test_poly = poly.fit_transform(X_test)
# Fit a polynomial regression
linreg = LinearRegression().fit(X_train_poly, y_train)
# Compute yhat or ypred
y_pred = linreg.predict(X_test_poly)
# Compute MSE *(nK/N)
test_mse = mean_squared_error(y_test, y_pred)*float(len(X_train))/float(len(X))
# Append to list for different folds
mse.append(test_mse)
# Compute the mean for poylnomial 'j'
deg.append(np.mean(mse))

return(deg)

# Create and display a plot of K -Folds
df=pd.DataFrame()
for folds in [4,5,10]:
cvError=computeCVError(X,y,folds)
#print(cvError)
df1=pd.DataFrame(cvError)
df=pd.concat([df,df1],axis=1)
#print(cvError)

df.columns=['4-fold','5-fold','10-fold']
df=df.reindex([1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10])
df
fig2=df.plot()
fig2=plt.title("K Fold Cross Validation - Cross Validation Error vs Degree of Polynomial")
fig2=plt.xlabel("Degree of Polynomial")
fig2=plt.ylabel("Cross validation Error")
fig2.figure.savefig('foo2.png', bbox_inches='tight')


This concludes this 2nd part of this series. I will look into model tuning and model selection in R and Python in the coming parts. Comments, suggestions and corrections are welcome!
To be continued….
Watch this space!

Also see

To see all posts see Index of posts

# Introduction

This is the 1st part of a series of posts I intend to write on some common Machine Learning Algorithms in R and Python. In this first part I cover the following Machine Learning Algorithms

• Univariate Regression
• Multivariate Regression
• Polynomial Regression
• K Nearest Neighbors Regression

The code includes the implementation in both R and Python. This series of posts are based on the following 2 MOOC courses I did at Stanford Online and at Coursera

1. Statistical Learning, Prof Trevor Hastie & Prof Robert Tibesherani, Online Stanford
2. Applied Machine Learning in Python Prof Kevyn-Collin Thomson, University Of Michigan, Coursera

I have used the data sets from UCI Machine Learning repository(Communities and Crime and Auto MPG). I also use the Boston data set from MASS package

The content of this post and much more is now available as a compact book  on Amazon in both formats – as Paperback ($9.99) and a Kindle version($6.99/Rs449/). see ‘Practical Machine Learning with R and Python – Machine Learning in stereo

While coding in R and Python I found that there were some aspects that were more convenient in one language and some in the other. For example, plotting the fit in R is straightforward in R, while computing the R squared, splitting as Train & Test sets etc. are already available in Python. In any case, these minor inconveniences can be easily be implemented in either language.

R squared computation in R is computed as follows
$RSS=\sum (y-yhat)^{2}$
$TSS= \sum(y-mean(y))^{2}$
$Rsquared- 1-\frac{RSS}{TSS}$

Note: You can download this R Markdown file and the associated data sets from Github at MachineLearning-RandPython
Note 1: This post was created as an R Markdown file in RStudio which has a cool feature of including R and Python snippets. The plot of matplotlib needs a workaround but otherwise this is a real cool feature of RStudio!

## 1.1a Univariate Regression – R code

Here a simple linear regression line is fitted between a single input feature and the target variable

# Source in the R function library
source("RFunctions.R")
# Read the Boston data file
df=read.csv("Boston.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) # Data from MASS - Statistical Learning

# Split the data into training and test sets (75:25)
train_idx <- trainTestSplit(df,trainPercent=75,seed=5)
train <- df[train_idx, ]
test <- df[-train_idx, ]

# Fit a linear regression line between 'Median value of owner occupied homes' vs 'lower status of
# population'
fit=lm(medv~lstat,data=df)
# Display details of fir
summary(fit)
##
## Call:
## lm(formula = medv ~ lstat, data = df)
##
## Residuals:
##     Min      1Q  Median      3Q     Max
## -15.168  -3.990  -1.318   2.034  24.500
##
## Coefficients:
##             Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
## (Intercept) 34.55384    0.56263   61.41   <2e-16 ***
## lstat       -0.95005    0.03873  -24.53   <2e-16 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Residual standard error: 6.216 on 504 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.5441, Adjusted R-squared:  0.5432
## F-statistic: 601.6 on 1 and 504 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16
# Display the confidence intervals
confint(fit)
##                 2.5 %     97.5 %
## (Intercept) 33.448457 35.6592247
## lstat       -1.026148 -0.8739505
plot(df$lstat,df$medv, xlab="Lower status (%)",ylab="Median value of owned homes ($1000)", main="Median value of homes ($1000) vs Lowe status (%)")
abline(fit)
abline(fit,lwd=3)
abline(fit,lwd=3,col="red")

rsquared=Rsquared(fit,test,test$medv) sprintf("R-squared for uni-variate regression (Boston.csv) is : %f", rsquared) ## [1] "R-squared for uni-variate regression (Boston.csv) is : 0.556964" ## 1.1b Univariate Regression – Python code import numpy as np import pandas as pd import os import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression #os.chdir("C:\\software\\machine-learning\\RandPython") # Read the CSV file df = pd.read_csv("Boston.csv",encoding = "ISO-8859-1") # Select the feature variable X=df['lstat'] # Select the target y=df['medv'] # Split into train and test sets (75:25) X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y,random_state = 0) X_train=X_train.values.reshape(-1,1) X_test=X_test.values.reshape(-1,1) # Fit a linear model linreg = LinearRegression().fit(X_train, y_train) # Print the training and test R squared score print('R-squared score (training): {:.3f}'.format(linreg.score(X_train, y_train))) print('R-squared score (test): {:.3f}'.format(linreg.score(X_test, y_test))) # Plot the linear regression line fig=plt.scatter(X_train,y_train) # Create a range of points. Compute yhat=coeff1*x + intercept and plot x=np.linspace(0,40,20) fig1=plt.plot(x, linreg.coef_ * x + linreg.intercept_, color='red') fig1=plt.title("Median value of homes ($1000) vs Lowe status (%)")
fig1=plt.xlabel("Lower status (%)")
fig1=plt.ylabel("Median value of owned homes ($1000)") fig.figure.savefig('foo.png', bbox_inches='tight') fig1.figure.savefig('foo1.png', bbox_inches='tight') print "Finished"  ## R-squared score (training): 0.571 ## R-squared score (test): 0.458 ## Finished ## 1.2a Multivariate Regression – R code # Read crimes data crimesDF <- read.csv("crimes.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) # Remove the 1st 7 columns which do not impact output crimesDF1 <- crimesDF[,7:length(crimesDF)] # Convert all to numeric crimesDF2 <- sapply(crimesDF1,as.numeric) # Check for NAs a <- is.na(crimesDF2) # Set to 0 as an imputation crimesDF2[a] <-0 #Create as a dataframe crimesDF2 <- as.data.frame(crimesDF2) #Create a train/test split train_idx <- trainTestSplit(crimesDF2,trainPercent=75,seed=5) train <- crimesDF2[train_idx, ] test <- crimesDF2[-train_idx, ] # Fit a multivariate regression model between crimesPerPop and all other features fit <- lm(ViolentCrimesPerPop~.,data=train) # Compute and print R Squared rsquared=Rsquared(fit,test,test$ViolentCrimesPerPop)
sprintf("R-squared for multi-variate regression (crimes.csv)  is : %f", rsquared)
## [1] "R-squared for multi-variate regression (crimes.csv)  is : 0.653940"

## 1.2b Multivariate Regression – Python code

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression
#Remove the 1st 7 columns
crimesDF1=crimesDF.iloc[:,7:crimesDF.shape[1]]
# Convert to numeric
crimesDF2 = crimesDF1.apply(pd.to_numeric, errors='coerce')
# Impute NA to 0s
crimesDF2.fillna(0, inplace=True)

# Select the X (feature vatiables - all)
X=crimesDF2.iloc[:,0:120]

# Set the target
y=crimesDF2.iloc[:,121]

X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y,random_state = 0)
# Fit a multivariate regression model
linreg = LinearRegression().fit(X_train, y_train)

# compute and print the R Square
print('R-squared score (training): {:.3f}'.format(linreg.score(X_train, y_train)))
print('R-squared score (test): {:.3f}'.format(linreg.score(X_test, y_test)))
## R-squared score (training): 0.699
## R-squared score (test): 0.677

## 1.3a Polynomial Regression – R

For Polynomial regression , polynomials of degree 1,2 & 3 are used and R squared is computed. It can be seen that the quadaratic model provides the best R squared score and hence the best fit

 # Polynomial degree 1
df=read.csv("auto_mpg.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) # Data from UCI
df1 <- as.data.frame(sapply(df,as.numeric))

# Select key columns
df2 <- df1 %>% select(cylinder,displacement, horsepower,weight, acceleration, year,mpg)
df3 <- df2[complete.cases(df2),]

# Split as train and test sets
train_idx <- trainTestSplit(df3,trainPercent=75,seed=5)
train <- df3[train_idx, ]
test <- df3[-train_idx, ]

# Fit a model of degree 1
fit <- lm(mpg~. ,data=train)
rsquared1 <-Rsquared(fit,test,test$mpg) sprintf("R-squared for Polynomial regression of degree 1 (auto_mpg.csv) is : %f", rsquared1) ## [1] "R-squared for Polynomial regression of degree 1 (auto_mpg.csv) is : 0.763607" # Polynomial degree 2 - Quadratic x = as.matrix(df3[1:6]) # Make a polynomial of degree 2 for feature variables before split df4=as.data.frame(poly(x,2,raw=TRUE)) df5 <- cbind(df4,df3[7]) # Split into train and test set train_idx <- trainTestSplit(df5,trainPercent=75,seed=5) train <- df5[train_idx, ] test <- df5[-train_idx, ] # Fit the quadratic model fit <- lm(mpg~. ,data=train) # Compute R squared rsquared2=Rsquared(fit,test,test$mpg)
sprintf("R-squared for Polynomial regression of degree 2 (auto_mpg.csv)  is : %f", rsquared2)
## [1] "R-squared for Polynomial regression of degree 2 (auto_mpg.csv)  is : 0.831372"
#Polynomial degree 3
x = as.matrix(df3[1:6])
# Make polynomial of degree 4  of feature variables before split
df4=as.data.frame(poly(x,3,raw=TRUE))
df5 <- cbind(df4,df3[7])
train_idx <- trainTestSplit(df5,trainPercent=75,seed=5)

train <- df5[train_idx, ]
test <- df5[-train_idx, ]
# Fit a model of degree 3
fit <- lm(mpg~. ,data=train)
# Compute R squared
rsquared3=Rsquared(fit,test,test$mpg) sprintf("R-squared for Polynomial regression of degree 2 (auto_mpg.csv) is : %f", rsquared3) ## [1] "R-squared for Polynomial regression of degree 2 (auto_mpg.csv) is : 0.773225" df=data.frame(degree=c(1,2,3),Rsquared=c(rsquared1,rsquared2,rsquared3)) # Make a plot of Rsquared and degree ggplot(df,aes(x=degree,y=Rsquared)) +geom_point() + geom_line(color="blue") + ggtitle("Polynomial regression - R squared vs Degree of polynomial") + xlab("Degree") + ylab("R squared") ## 1.3a Polynomial Regression – Python For Polynomial regression , polynomials of degree 1,2 & 3 are used and R squared is computed. It can be seen that the quadaratic model provides the best R squared score and hence the best fit import numpy as np import pandas as pd import os import matplotlib.pyplot as plt from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression from sklearn.preprocessing import PolynomialFeatures autoDF =pd.read_csv("auto_mpg.csv",encoding="ISO-8859-1") autoDF.shape autoDF.columns # Select key columns autoDF1=autoDF[['mpg','cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight','acceleration','year']] # Convert columns to numeric autoDF2 = autoDF1.apply(pd.to_numeric, errors='coerce') # Drop NAs autoDF3=autoDF2.dropna() autoDF3.shape X=autoDF3[['cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight','acceleration','year']] y=autoDF3['mpg'] # Polynomial degree 1 X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y,random_state = 0) linreg = LinearRegression().fit(X_train, y_train) print('R-squared score - Polynomial degree 1 (training): {:.3f}'.format(linreg.score(X_train, y_train))) # Compute R squared rsquared1 =linreg.score(X_test, y_test) print('R-squared score - Polynomial degree 1 (test): {:.3f}'.format(linreg.score(X_test, y_test))) # Polynomial degree 2 poly = PolynomialFeatures(degree=2) X_poly = poly.fit_transform(X) X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X_poly, y,random_state = 0) linreg = LinearRegression().fit(X_train, y_train) # Compute R squared print('R-squared score - Polynomial degree 2 (training): {:.3f}'.format(linreg.score(X_train, y_train))) rsquared2 =linreg.score(X_test, y_test) print('R-squared score - Polynomial degree 2 (test): {:.3f}\n'.format(linreg.score(X_test, y_test))) #Polynomial degree 3 poly = PolynomialFeatures(degree=3) X_poly = poly.fit_transform(X) X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X_poly, y,random_state = 0) linreg = LinearRegression().fit(X_train, y_train) print('(R-squared score -Polynomial degree 3 (training): {:.3f}' .format(linreg.score(X_train, y_train))) # Compute R squared rsquared3 =linreg.score(X_test, y_test) print('R-squared score Polynomial degree 3 (test): {:.3f}\n'.format(linreg.score(X_test, y_test))) degree=[1,2,3] rsquared =[rsquared1,rsquared2,rsquared3] fig2=plt.plot(degree,rsquared) fig2=plt.title("Polynomial regression - R squared vs Degree of polynomial") fig2=plt.xlabel("Degree") fig2=plt.ylabel("R squared") fig2.figure.savefig('foo2.png', bbox_inches='tight') print "Finished plotting and saving"  ## R-squared score - Polynomial degree 1 (training): 0.811 ## R-squared score - Polynomial degree 1 (test): 0.799 ## R-squared score - Polynomial degree 2 (training): 0.861 ## R-squared score - Polynomial degree 2 (test): 0.847 ## ## (R-squared score -Polynomial degree 3 (training): 0.933 ## R-squared score Polynomial degree 3 (test): 0.710 ## ## Finished plotting and saving ## 1.4 K Nearest Neighbors The code below implements KNN Regression both for R and Python. This is done for different neighbors. The R squared is computed in each case. This is repeated after performing feature scaling. It can be seen the model fit is much better after feature scaling. Normalization refers to $X_{normalized} = \frac{X-min(X)}{max(X-min(X))}$ Another technique that is used is Standardization which is $X_{standardized} = \frac{X-mean(X)}{sd(X)}$ ## 1.4a K Nearest Neighbors Regression – R( Unnormalized) The R code below does not use feature scaling # KNN regression requires the FNN package df=read.csv("auto_mpg.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) # Data from UCI df1 <- as.data.frame(sapply(df,as.numeric)) df2 <- df1 %>% select(cylinder,displacement, horsepower,weight, acceleration, year,mpg) df3 <- df2[complete.cases(df2),] # Split train and test train_idx <- trainTestSplit(df3,trainPercent=75,seed=5) train <- df3[train_idx, ] test <- df3[-train_idx, ] # Select the feature variables train.X=train[,1:6] # Set the target for training train.Y=train[,7] # Do the same for test set test.X=test[,1:6] test.Y=test[,7] rsquared <- NULL # Create a list of neighbors neighbors <-c(1,2,4,8,10,14) for(i in seq_along(neighbors)){ # Perform a KNN regression fit knn=knn.reg(train.X,test.X,train.Y,k=neighbors[i]) # Compute R sqaured rsquared[i]=knnRSquared(knn$pred,test.Y)
}

# Make a dataframe for plotting
df <- data.frame(neighbors,Rsquared=rsquared)
# Plot the number of neighors vs the R squared
ggplot(df,aes(x=neighbors,y=Rsquared)) + geom_point() +geom_line(color="blue") +
xlab("Number of neighbors") + ylab("R squared") +
ggtitle("KNN regression - R squared vs Number of Neighors (Unnormalized)")

## 1.4b K Nearest Neighbors Regression – Python( Unnormalized)

The Python code below does not use feature scaling

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression
from sklearn.preprocessing import PolynomialFeatures
from sklearn.neighbors import KNeighborsRegressor
autoDF.shape
autoDF.columns
autoDF1=autoDF[['mpg','cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight','acceleration','year']]
autoDF2 = autoDF1.apply(pd.to_numeric, errors='coerce')
autoDF3=autoDF2.dropna()
autoDF3.shape
X=autoDF3[['cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight','acceleration','year']]
y=autoDF3['mpg']

# Perform a train/test split
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, random_state = 0)
# Create a list of neighbors
rsquared=[]
neighbors=[1,2,4,8,10,14]
for i in neighbors:
# Fit a KNN model
knnreg = KNeighborsRegressor(n_neighbors = i).fit(X_train, y_train)
# Compute R squared
rsquared.append(knnreg.score(X_test, y_test))
print('R-squared test score: {:.3f}'
.format(knnreg.score(X_test, y_test)))
# Plot the number of neighors vs the R squared
fig3=plt.plot(neighbors,rsquared)
fig3=plt.title("KNN regression - R squared vs Number of neighbors(Unnormalized)")
fig3=plt.xlabel("Neighbors")
fig3=plt.ylabel("R squared")
fig3.figure.savefig('foo3.png', bbox_inches='tight')
print "Finished plotting and saving"
## R-squared test score: 0.527
## R-squared test score: 0.678
## R-squared test score: 0.707
## R-squared test score: 0.684
## R-squared test score: 0.683
## R-squared test score: 0.670
## Finished plotting and saving

## 1.4c K Nearest Neighbors Regression – R( Normalized)

It can be seen that R squared improves when the features are normalized.

df=read.csv("auto_mpg.csv",stringsAsFactors = FALSE) # Data from UCI
df1 <- as.data.frame(sapply(df,as.numeric))
df2 <- df1 %>% select(cylinder,displacement, horsepower,weight, acceleration, year,mpg)
df3 <- df2[complete.cases(df2),]

# Perform MinMaxScaling of feature variables
train.X.scaled=MinMaxScaler(train.X)
test.X.scaled=MinMaxScaler(test.X)

# Create a list of neighbors
rsquared <- NULL
neighbors <-c(1,2,4,6,8,10,12,15,20,25,30)
for(i in seq_along(neighbors)){
# Fit a KNN model
knn=knn.reg(train.X.scaled,test.X.scaled,train.Y,k=i)
# Compute R ssquared
rsquared[i]=knnRSquared(knn\$pred,test.Y)

}

df <- data.frame(neighbors,Rsquared=rsquared)
# Plot the number of neighors vs the R squared
ggplot(df,aes(x=neighbors,y=Rsquared)) + geom_point() +geom_line(color="blue") +
xlab("Number of neighbors") + ylab("R squared") +
ggtitle("KNN regression - R squared vs Number of Neighors(Normalized)")

## 1.4d K Nearest Neighbors Regression – Python( Normalized)

R squared improves when the features are normalized with MinMaxScaling

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression
from sklearn.preprocessing import PolynomialFeatures
from sklearn.neighbors import KNeighborsRegressor
from sklearn.preprocessing import MinMaxScaler
autoDF.shape
autoDF.columns
autoDF1=autoDF[['mpg','cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight','acceleration','year']]
autoDF2 = autoDF1.apply(pd.to_numeric, errors='coerce')
autoDF3=autoDF2.dropna()
autoDF3.shape
X=autoDF3[['cylinder','displacement','horsepower','weight','acceleration','year']]
y=autoDF3['mpg']

# Perform a train/ test  split
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, random_state = 0)
# Use MinMaxScaling
scaler = MinMaxScaler()
X_train_scaled = scaler.fit_transform(X_train)
# Apply scaling on test set
X_test_scaled = scaler.transform(X_test)

# Create a list of neighbors
rsquared=[]
neighbors=[1,2,4,6,8,10,12,15,20,25,30]
for i in neighbors:
# Fit a KNN model
knnreg = KNeighborsRegressor(n_neighbors = i).fit(X_train_scaled, y_train)
# Compute R squared
rsquared.append(knnreg.score(X_test_scaled, y_test))
print('R-squared test score: {:.3f}'
.format(knnreg.score(X_test_scaled, y_test)))

# Plot the number of neighors vs the R squared
fig4=plt.plot(neighbors,rsquared)
fig4=plt.title("KNN regression - R squared vs Number of neighbors(Normalized)")
fig4=plt.xlabel("Neighbors")
fig4=plt.ylabel("R squared")
fig4.figure.savefig('foo4.png', bbox_inches='tight')
print "Finished plotting and saving"
## R-squared test score: 0.703
## R-squared test score: 0.810
## R-squared test score: 0.830
## R-squared test score: 0.838
## R-squared test score: 0.834
## R-squared test score: 0.828
## R-squared test score: 0.827
## R-squared test score: 0.826
## R-squared test score: 0.816
## R-squared test score: 0.815
## R-squared test score: 0.809
## Finished plotting and saving

# Conclusion

In this initial post I cover the regression models when the output is continous. I intend to touch upon other Machine Learning algorithms.
Comments, suggestions and corrections are welcome.

Watch this this space!

To be continued….

To see all posts see Index of posts