I am performing a machine learning task wherein I am using logistic regression for topic classification.
If this is my code:
model= LogisticRegression()
model= model.fit(mat_tmp, label_tmp)
y_train_pred = model.predict(mat_tmp_test)
print(metrics.accuracy_score(label_tmp_test, y_train_pred))
Is there a way I can output what exactly is happening inside the model. Like probably a working example of what my model is doing? Like maybe displaying 2-3 documents and how they are being classified?
In order to be fully aware of what is happening in your model, you must first take some time to study the logistic regression algorithm (eg. from lecture notes or Wikipedia). As with other supervised techniques, logistic regression has hyper-parameters and parameters. Hyper-parameters basically specify how your algorithm runs, which you must provide at initialisation (ie. before it sees any data). For example, you could have prior information about the distribution of classes, which then would be a hyper-parameter. Parameters are "learnt" from your data.
Once you understand the algorithm, the interesting question will be what the parameters of your model are (recall that these are retrieved from the data). By visiting the documentation, you find in the attributes section, that this classifier has 3 parameters, which you can access by their field names.
If you are not interested in such details, but only want to assess the accuracy of your classifier, a useful technique is cross-validation. You split your labeled data into k equal sized subsets, and train your classifier using k-1 of them. Then you evaluate the trained classifier on the remaining 1 subset and calculate the accuracy (ie. what proportion of the data could be predicted properly). This method has its drawbacks, but proves to be very useful in general.
Related
I am a beginner in machine learning in python, and I am working on a binary classification problem. I have implemented a logistic regression model with an average accuracy of around 75%. I have tried numerous ways to improve the accuracy of the model, such as one-hot encoding of categorical variables, scaling of the continuous variables, and I did a grid search to find the best parameters. They all failed to improve the accuracy. So, I looked into unsupervised learning methods in order to improve it.
I tried using KMeans clustering, and I set the n_clusters into 2. I trained the logistic regression model using the X_train and y_train values. After that, I tried testing the model on the training data using cross-validation but I set the cross-validation to be against the labels predicted by the KMeans:
kmeans = KMeans(n_clusters = 2)
kmeans.fit(X_train)
logreg = LogisticRegression().fit(X_train, y_train)
cross_val_score(logreg, X_train, kmeans.labels_, cv = 5)
When using the cross_val_score, the accuracy is averaging over 95%. However, when I use the .score() method:
logreg.score(X_train, kmeans.labels_)
, the score is in the 60s. My questions are:
What does the significance (or meaning) of the score that is produced when testing the model against the labels predicted by k-means?
How can I use k-means clustering to improve the accuracy of the model? I tried adding a 'cluster' column that contains the clustering labels to the training data and fit the logistic regression, but it also didn't improve the score.
Why is there a huge discrepancy between the score when evaluated via cross_val_predict and the .score() method?
I'm having a hard time understanding the context of your problem based on the snippet you provided. Strong work for providing minimal code, but in this case I feel it may have been a bit too minimal. Regardless, I'm going to read between the lines and state some relevent ideas. I'll then attempt to answer your questions more directly.
I am working on a binary classification problem. I have implemented a logistic regression model with an average accuracy of around 75%
This only tells a small amount of the story. knowing what data your classifying and it's general form is pretty vital, and accuracy doesn't tell us a lot about how innaccuracy is distributed through the problem.
Some natural questions:
Is one class 50% accurate and another class is 100% accurate? are the classes both 75% accurate?
what is the class balance? (is there more of one class than the other)?
how much overlap do these classes have?
I recommend profiling your training and testing set, and maybe running your data through TSNE to get an idea of class overlap in your vector space.
these plots will give you an idea of how much overlap your two classes have. In essence, TSNE maps a high dimensional X to a 2d X while attempting to preserve proximity. You can then plot your flagged Y values as color and the 2d X values as points on a grid to get an idea of how tightly packed your classes are in high dimensional space. In the image above, this is a very easy classification problem as each class exists in it's own island. The more these islands mix together, the harder classification will be.
did a grid search to find the best parameters
hot take, but don't use grid search, random search is better. (source Artificial Intelligence by Jones and Barlett). Grid search repeats too much information, wasting time re-exploring similar parameters.
I tried using KMeans clustering, and I set the n_clusters into 2. I trained the logistic regression model using the X_train and y_train values. After that, I tried testing the model on the training data using cross-validation but I set the cross-validation to be against the labels predicted by the KMeans:
So, to rephrase, you trained your model to predict an output given some input, then tested how it performed predicting the same data and got 75%. This is called training accuracy (as opposed to validation or test accuracy). A low training accuracy is indicative of one of two things:
there's a lot of overlap between your classes. If this is the case, I would look into feature engineering. Find a vector space which better segregates the two classes.
there's not a lot of overlap, but the front between the two classes is complex. You need a model with more parameters to segregate your two classes.
model complexity isn't free though. See the curse of dimensionality and overfitting.
ok, answering more directly
these accuracy scores mean your model isn't complex enough to learn the problem, or there's too much overlap between the two classes to see a better accuracy.
I wouldn't use k-means clustering to try to improve this. k-means attempts to find cluster information based on location in a vector space, but you already have flagged data y_train so you already know which clusters data should belong in. Try modifying X_train in some way to get better segregation, or try a more complex model. you can use things like k-means or TSNE to check your transformed X_train for better segregation, but I wouldn't use them directly. Obligatory reminder that you need to test and validate with holdout data. see another answer I provided for more info.
I'd need more code to figure that one out.
p.s. welcome to stack overflow! Keep at it.
The assignment is to write a simple ML program that trains and predicts on a dataset of our choice. I want to determine the best model for my data. The response is a class (0/1). I wrote code to try different cross-validation methods (validation set, leave-one-out, and k-fold) on multiple models (linear regression, logistic regression, k-nearest neighbors, linear discriminant analysis). Per model, I report the MSE for each cross-validation method and track the lowest one. I then pick the model with the lowest tracked MSE. This is where I think I went wrong. If I am cross-validating multiple models, should I use the same cross-validation method?
I am trying to get the confidence intervals from an XGBoost saved model in a .tar.gz file that is created using python XGBoost library.
The problem is that the model has already been fitted, and I dont have training data any more, I just have inference or serving data to predict. All the examples that I found entail using a training and test data to create either quantile regression models, or bagged models, but I dont think I have the chance to do that.
Why your desired approach will not work
I assume we are talking about regression here. Given a regression model that you cannot modify, I think you will not be able to achieve your desired result using only the given model. The model was trained to calculate a continuous value that appoximates some objective value (i.e., its true value) based on some given input. Nothing more.
Possible solution
The only workaround I can think of would be to train two more models. These model's training goal would be to predict the quality of the output of your given model. One would calculate the upper bound of a given (i.e., predefined by you at training time) confidence interval and the other one the lower bound. This would probably include a lot of feature engineering. One would probably like to find features that correlate with the prediction quality of the original model.
Is there a way to retrieve the list of feature names used for training of a classifier, once it has been trained with the fit method? I would like to get this information before applying to unseen data.
The data used for training is a pandas DataFrame and in my case, the classifier is a RandomForestClassifier.
I have a solution which works but is not very elegant. This is an old post with no existing solutions so I suppose there are not any.
Create and fit your model. For example
model = GradientBoostingRegressor(**params)
model.fit(X_train, y_train)
Then you can add an attribute which is the 'feature_names' since you know them at training time
model.feature_names = list(X_train.columns.values)
I typically then put the model into a binary file to pass it around but you can ignore this
joblib.dump(model, filename)
loaded_model = joblib.load(filename)
Then you can get the feature names back from the model to use them when you predict
f_names = loaded_model.feature_names
loaded_model.predict(X_pred[f_names])
Based on the documentation and previous experience, there is no way to get a list of the features considered at least at one of the splitting.
Is your concern that you do not want to use all your features for prediction, just the ones actually used for training? In this case I suggest to list the feature_importances_ after fitting and eliminate the features that does not seem relevant. Then train a new model with only the relevant features and use those features for prediction as well.
You don't need to know which features were selected for the training. Just make sure to give, during the prediction step, to the fitted classifier the same features you used during the learning phase.
The Random Forest Classifier will only use the features on which it makes its splits. Those will be the same as those learnt during the first phase. Others won't be considered.
If the shape of your test data is not the same as the training data it will throw an error, even if the test data contains all the features used for the splits of you decision trees.
What's more, since Random Forests make random selection of features for your decision trees (called estimators in sklearn) all the features are likely to be used at least once.
However, if you want to know the features used, you can just call the attributes n_features_ and feature_importances_ on your classifier once fitted.
You can look here to see how you can retrieve the names of the most important features you used.
You can extract feature names from a trained XGBOOST model as follows:
model.get_booster().feature_names
I need advice choosing a model and machine learning algorithm for a classification problem.
I'm trying to predict a binary outcome for a subject. I have 500,000 records in my data set and 20 continuous and categorical features. Each subject has 10--20 records. The data is labeled with its outcome.
So far I'm thinking logistic regression model and kernel approximation, based on the cheat-sheet here.
I am unsure where to start when implementing this in either R or Python.
Thanks!
Choosing an algorithm and optimizing the parameter is a difficult task in any data mining project. Because it must customized for your data and problem. Try different algorithm like SVM,Random Forest, Logistic Regression, KNN and... and test Cross Validation for each of them and then compare them.
You can use GridSearch in sickit learn to try different parameters and optimize the parameters for each algorithm. also try this project
witch test a range of parameters with genetic algorithm
Features
If your categorical features don't have too many possible different values, you might want to have a look at sklearn.preprocessing.OneHotEncoder.
Model choice
The choice of "the best" model depends mainly on the amount of available training data and the simplicity of the decision boundary you expect to get.
You can try dimensionality reduction to 2 or 3 dimensions. Then you can visualize your data and see if there is a nice decision boundary.
With 500,000 training examples you can think about using a neural network. I can recommend Keras for beginners and TensorFlow for people who know how neural networks work.
You should also know that there are Ensemble methods.
A nice cheat sheet what to use is on in the sklearn tutorial you already found:
(source: scikit-learn.org)
Just try it, compare different results. Without more information it is not possible to give you better advice.