I am trying to build a predictive model using python. The training and test data set has over 400 variables. On using feature selection on training data set the number of variables are reduced to 180
from sklearn.feature_selection import VarianceThreshold
sel = VarianceThreshold(threshold = .9)
and then I am training a model using gradient boosting algorithm achieveing .84 AUC accuracy in cross validation.
from sklearn import ensemble
from sklearn.cross_validation import train_test_split
from sklearn.metrics import roc_auc_score as auc
df_fit, df_eval, y_fit, y_eval= train_test_split( df, y, test_size=0.2, random_state=1 )
boosting_model = ensemble.GradientBoostingClassifier(n_estimators=100, max_depth=3,
min_samples_leaf=100, learning_rate=0.1,
subsample=0.5, random_state=1)
boosting_model.fit(df_fit, y_fit)
But when I am trying to use this model to predict for prediction data set it is giving me error
predict_target = boosting_model.predict(df_prediction)
Error: Number of variables in prediction data set 'df_prediction' does not match the number of variables in the model
Which makes sense because total variables in testing data remains to be over 400.
My question is there anyway to bypass this problem and keep using feature selection for predictive modeling. Because if I remove it the accuracy of model drops down to .5 which is very poor.
Thanks!
You should transform your prediction matrix through your feature selection too. So somewhere in your code you do
df = sel.fit_transform(X)
and before predicting
df_prediction = sel.transform(X_prediction)
Related
I have a csv of size 12500 X 3. The first two columns (A and B) are inputs and the the final column (C) is the sum of the two columns.
I wanted to build a prediction model to get the value of C for a given A and B. This is just a basic model to imporve my understanding of machine learning.
The accuracy score is almost zero (0.00032) and the model is way to simple to get the predictions wrong. The code is below:
import pandas as pd
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score
data = pd.read_csv('Dataset.csv') #importing dataset
X = data.drop(columns=['C'])
y = data['C']
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, test_size=0.2)
model = DecisionTreeClassifier()
model.fit(X_train,y_train)
predictions = model.predict(X_test)
score = accuracy_score(y_test, predictions)
score
I did not even include outlier into the data and I create the csv using excel formulae. I used jupyter notebook to build this prediction model. Can someone please point out if/what I'm doing wrong?
Before you build your model, you should understand the behavior of the model and its main function. Decision Tree is used to classify data based on the criterias extracted from data. For this purpose, you should just choose the simple Linear Regression model, not the Decision Tree.
I am separating the features in X and y then I preprocess my train test data after splitting it with k fold cross validation. After that i fit the train data to my Random Forest Regressor model and calculate the confidence score. Why do i preprocess after splitting? because people tell me that it's more correct to do it that way and i'm keeping that principle since that for the sake of my model performance.
This is my first time using KFold Cross Validation because my model score overifts and i thought i could fix it with cross validation. I'm still confused of how to use this, i have read the documentation and some articles but i do not really catch how do i really imply it to my model but i tried anyway and my model still overfits. Using train test split or cross validation resulting my model score is still 0.999, I do not know what is my mistake since i'm very new using this method but i think maybe i did it wrong so it does not fix the overfitting. Please tell me what's wrong with my code and how to fix this
import pandas as pd
import seaborn as sns
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.impute import SimpleImputer
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.model_selection import KFold
from sklearn.preprocessing import LabelEncoder
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestRegressor
import scipy.stats as ss
avo_sales = pd.read_csv('avocados.csv')
avo_sales.rename(columns = {'4046':'small PLU sold',
'4225':'large PLU sold',
'4770':'xlarge PLU sold'},
inplace= True)
avo_sales.columns = avo_sales.columns.str.replace(' ','')
x = np.array(avo_sales.drop(['TotalBags','Unnamed:0','year','region','Date'],1))
y = np.array(avo_sales.TotalBags)
# X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(x, y, test_size=0.2)
kf = KFold(n_splits=10)
for train_index, test_index in kf.split(x):
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = x[train_index], x[test_index], y[train_index], y[test_index]
impC = SimpleImputer(strategy='most_frequent')
X_train[:,8] = impC.fit_transform(X_train[:,8].reshape(-1,1)).ravel()
X_test[:,8] = impC.transform(X_test[:,8].reshape(-1,1)).ravel()
imp = SimpleImputer(strategy='median')
X_train[:,1:8] = imp.fit_transform(X_train[:,1:8])
X_test[:,1:8] = imp.transform(X_test[:,1:8])
le = LabelEncoder()
X_train[:,8] = le.fit_transform(X_train[:,8])
X_test[:,8] = le.transform(X_test[:,8])
rfr = RandomForestRegressor()
rfr.fit(X_train, y_train)
confidence = rfr.score(X_test, y_test)
print(confidence)
The reason you're overfitting is because a non-regularized tree-based model will adjust to the data until all training samples are correctly classified. See for example this image:
As you can see, this does not generalize well. If you don't specify arguments that regularize the trees, the model will fit the test data poorly because it will basically just learn the noise in the training data. There are many ways to regularize trees in sklearn, you can find them here. For instance:
max_features
min_samples_leaf
max_depth
With proper regularization, you can get a model that generalizes well to the test data. Look at a regularized model for instance:
To regularize your model, instantiate the RandomForestRegressor() module like this:
rfr = RandomForestRegressor(max_features=0.5, min_samples_leaf=4, max_depth=6)
These argument values are arbitrary, it's up to you to find the ones that fit your data best. You can use domain-specific knowledge to choose these values, or a hyperparameter tuning search like GridSearchCV or RandomizedSearchCV.
Other than that, imputing the mean and median might bring a lot of noise in your data. I would advise against it unless you had no other choice.
While #NicolasGervais answer gets to the bottom of why your specific model is overfitting, I think there is a conceptual misunderstanding with regards to cross-validation in the original question; you seem to think that:
Cross-validation is a method that improves the performance of a machine learning model.
But this is not the case.
Cross validation is a method that is used to estimate the performance of a given model on unseen data. By itself, it cannot improve the accuracy.
In other words, the respective scores can tell you if your model is overfitting the training data, but simply applying cross-validation does not make your model better.
Example:
Let's look at a dataset with 10 points, and fit a line through it:
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression
X = np.random.randint(0,10,10)
Y = np.random.randint(0,10,10)
fig = plt.figure(figsize=(1,10))
def line(x, slope, intercept):
return slope * x + intercept
for i in range(5):
# note that this is not technically 5-fold cross-validation
# because I allow the same datapoint to go into the test set
# several times. For illustrative purposes it is fine imho.
test_indices = np.random.choice(np.arange(10),2)
train_indices = list(set(range(10))-set(test_indices))
# get train and test sets
X_train, Y_train = X[train_indices], Y[train_indices]
X_test, Y_test = X[test_indices], Y[test_indices]
# training set has one feature and multiple entries
# so, reshape(-1,1)
X_train, Y_train, X_test, Y_test = X_train.reshape(-1,1), Y_train.reshape(-1,1), X_test.reshape(-1,1), Y_test.reshape(-1,1)
# fit and evaluate linear regression
reg = LinearRegression().fit(X_train, Y_train)
score_train = reg.score(X_train, Y_train)
score_test = reg.score(X_test, Y_test)
# extract coefficients from model:
slope, intercept = reg.coef_[0], reg.intercept_[0]
print(score_test)
# show train and test sets
plt.subplot(5,1,i+1)
plt.scatter(X_train, Y_train, c='k')
plt.scatter(X_test, Y_test, c='r')
# draw regression line
plt.plot(np.arange(10), line(np.arange(10), slope, intercept))
plt.ylim(0,10)
plt.xlim(0,10)
plt.title('train: {:.2f} test: {:.2f}'.format(score_train, score_test))
You can see that the scores on training and test set are vastly different. You can also see that the estimated parameters vary a lot with the change of train and test set.
That does not make your linear model any better at all.
But now you know exactly how bad it is :)
I am looking to train either a random forest or gradient boosting algorithm using sklearn. The data I have is structured in a way that it has a variable weight for each data point that corresponds to the amount of times that data point occurs in the dataset. Is there a way to give sklearn this weight during the training process, or do I need to expand my dataset to a non-weighted version that has duplicate data points each represented individually?
You can definitely specify the weights while training these classifiers in scikit-learn. Specifically, this happens during the fit step. Here is an example using RandomForestClassifier but the same goes also for GradientBoostingClassifier:
from sklearn.datasets import load_breast_cancer
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestClassifier
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
import numpy as np
data = load_breast_cancer()
X = data.data
y = data.target
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X,y, random_state = 42)
Here I define some arbitrary weights just for the sake of the example:
weights = np.random.choice([1,2],len(y_train))
And then you can fit your model with these models:
rfc = RandomForestClassifier(n_estimators = 20, random_state = 42)
rfc.fit(X_train,y_train, sample_weight = weights)
You can then evaluate your model on your test data.
Now, to your last point, you could in this example resample your training set according to the weights by duplication. But in most real world examples, this could end up being very tedious because
you would need to make sure all your weights are integers to perform duplication
you would have to uselessly multiply the size of your data, which is memory-consuming and is most likely going to slow down the training procedure
I have a very unbalanced dataset (5000 positive, 300000 negative). I am using sklearn RandomForestClassifier to try and predict the probability of the positive class. I have data for multiple years and one of the features I've engineered is the class in the previous year, so I am withholding the last year of the dataset to test on in addition to my test set from within the years I'm training on.
Here is what I've tried (and the result):
Upsampling with SMOTE and SMOTEENN (weird score distributions, see first pic, predicted probabilities for positive and negative class are both the same, i.e., the model predicts a very low probability for most of the positive class)
Downsampling to a balanced dataset (recall is ~0.80 for the test set, but 0.07 for the out-of-year test set from sheer number of total negatives in the unbalanced out of year test set, see second pic)
Leave it unbalanced (weird scoring distribution again, precision goes up to ~0.60 and recall falls to 0.05 and 0.10 for test and out-of-year test set)
XGBoost (slightly better recall on the out-of-year test set, 0.11)
What should I try next? I'd like to optimize for F1, as both false positives and false negatives are equally bad in my case. I would like to incorporate k-fold cross validation and have read I should do this before upsampling, a) should I do this/is it likely to help and b) how can I incorporate this into a pipeline similar to this:
from imblearn.pipeline import make_pipeline, Pipeline
clf_rf = RandomForestClassifier(n_estimators=25, random_state=1)
smote_enn = SMOTEENN(smote = sm)
kf = StratifiedKFold(n_splits=5)
pipeline = make_pipeline(??)
pipeline.fit(X_train, ytrain)
ypred = pipeline.predict(Xtest)
ypredooy = pipeline.predict(Xtestooy)
Upsampling with SMOTE and SMOTEENN : I am far from being an expert with those but by upsampling your dataset you might amplify existing noise which induce overfitting. This could explain the fact that your algorithm cannot correctly classify, thus giving the results in the first graph.
I found a little bit more info here and maybe how to improve your results:
https://sci2s.ugr.es/sites/default/files/ficherosPublicaciones/1773_ver14_ASOC_SMOTE_FRPS.pdf
When you downsample you seem to encounter the same overfitting problem as I understand it (at least for the target result of the previous year). It is hard to deduce the reason behind it without a view on the data though.
Your overfitting problem might come from the number of features you use that could add unnecessary noise. You might try to reduce the number of features you use and gradually increase it (using a RFE model). More info here:
https://machinelearningmastery.com/feature-selection-in-python-with-scikit-learn/
For the models you used, you mention Random Forest and XGBoost, but you did not mention having used simpler model. You could try simpler model and focus on you data engineering.
If you have not try it yet, maybe you could:
Downsample your data
Normalize all your data with a StandardScaler
Test "brute force" tuning of simple models such as Naive Bayes and Logistic Regression
# Define steps of the pipeline
steps = [('scaler', StandardScaler()),
('log_reg', LogisticRegression())]
pipeline = Pipeline(steps)
# Specify the hyperparameters
parameters = {'C':[1, 10, 100],
'penalty':['l1', 'l2']}
# Create train and test sets
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, test_size=0.33,
random_state=42)
# Instantiate a GridSearchCV object: cv
cv = GridSearchCV(pipeline, param_grid=parameters)
# Fit to the training set
cv.fit(X_train, y_train)
Anyway, for your example the pipeline could be (I made it with Logistic Regression but you can change it with another ML algorithm and change the parameters grid consequently):
from sklearn.linear_model import LogisticRegression
from sklearn.preprocessing import StandardScaler
from sklearn.model_selection import GridSearchCV, StratifiedKFold, cross_val_score
from imblearn.combine import SMOTEENN
from imblearn.over_sampling import SMOTE
from imblearn.pipeline import Pipeline
param_grid = {'C': [1, 10, 100]}
clf = LogisticRegression(solver='lbfgs', multi_class = 'auto')
sme = SMOTEENN(smote = SMOTE(k_neighbors = 2), random_state=42)
grid = GridSearchCV(estimator=clf, param_grid = param_grid, score = "f1")
pipeline = Pipeline([('scale', StandardScaler()),
('SMOTEENN', sme),
('grid', grid)])
cv = StratifiedKFold(n_splits = 4, random_state=42)
score = cross_val_score(pipeline, X, y, cv=cv)
I hope this may help you.
(edit: I added score = "f1" in the GridSearchCV)
Is there any way to combine different classifiers into one in sklearn? I find sklearn.ensamble package. It contains different models, like AdaBoost and RandofForest, but they use decision trees under the hood and I want to use different methods, like SVM and Logistic regression. Is it possible with sklearn?
Do you just want to do majority voting? This is not implemented afaik. But as I said, you can just average the predict_proba scores. Or you can use LabelBinarizer of the predictions and average those. That would implement a voting scheme.
Even if you are not interested in the probabilities, averaging the predicted probabilities might be more robust than doing a simple voting. This is hard to tell without trying out, though.
Yes, you can train different models on the same dataset & Let each model make its predictions
# Import functions to compute accuracy and split data
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
# Import models, including VotingClassifier meta-model
from sklearn.linear_model import LogisticRegression
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier
from sklearn.neighbors import KNeighborsClassifier as KNN
from sklearn.ensemble import VotingClassifier
# Set seed for reproducibility
SEED = 1
Now Instantiate these models
# Instantiate lr
lr = LogisticRegression(random_state = SEED)
# Instantiate knn
knn = KNN(n_neighbors = 27)
# Instantiate dt
dt = DecisionTreeClassifier(min_samples_leaf = 0.13, random_state = SEED)
then define them as a list of classifiers and combine these different classifiers into one Meta-Model.
classifiers = [('Logistic Regression', lr),
('K Nearest Neighbours', knn),
('Classification Tree', dt)]
now iterate over this pre-defined list of classifiers using for loop
for clf_name, clf in classifiers:
# Fit clf to the training set
clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
# Predict y_pred
y_pred = clf.predict(X_test)
# Calculate accuracy
accuracy = accuracy_score(y_pred, y_test)
# Evaluate clf's accuracy on the test set
print('{:s} : {:.3f}'.format(clf_name, accuracy))
Finally, We'll evaluate the performance of a voting classifier that takes the outputs of the models defined in the list classifiers and assigns labels by majority voting.
# Voting Classifier
# Instantiate a VotingClassifier vc
vc = VotingClassifier(estimators = classifiers)
# Fit vc to the training set
vc.fit(X_train, y_train)
# Evaluate the test set predictions
y_pred = vc.predict(X_test)
# Calculate accuracy score
accuracy = accuracy_score(y_pred, y_test)
print('Voting Classifier: {:.3f}'.format(accuracy))
for this task I have been using DESLib, a library that has been incorporated into sklearn, but for some reason it is still quite unknown
it's really useful, and it has a lot of combo rules
https://deslib.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/rsna-2022-cervical-spine-fracture-detection/rules