I am using k-fold cross validation with k = 10. Thus, I have 10 ROC curves.
I would like to average between the curves. I can't just average the values on the Y axes (using perfcurve) because the vectors returned are not the same size.
[X1,Y1,T1,AUC1] = perfcurve(t_test(1),resp(1),1);
.
.
.
[X10,Y10,T10,AUC10] = perfcurve(t_test(10),resp(10),1);
How to solve this? How can I plot the average curve of the 10 ROC curves?
So, you have k curves with different number of points, all bound in [0..1] interval in both dimensions. First, you need to calculate interpolated values for each curve at specified query points. Now you have new curves with fixed number of points and can compute their mean. The interp1 function will do the interpolation part.
%% generating sample data
k = 10;
X = cell(k, 1);
Y = cell(k, 1);
hold on;
for i=1:k
n = 10+randi(10);
X{i} = sort([0 1 rand(1, n)]);
Y{i} = sort([0 1 rand(1, n)].^.5);
end
%% Calculating interpolations
% location of query points
X2 = linspace(0, 1, 50);
n = numel(X2);
% initializing values for different curves at different query points
Y2 = zeros(k, n);
for i=1:k
% finding interpolated values for i-th curve
Y2(i, :) = interp1(X{i}, Y{i}, X2);
end
% finding the mean
meanY = mean(Y2, 1);
Notice that different interpolation methods can affect your results. For example, the ROC plot data are kind of stairs data. To find the exact values on such curves, you should use the Previous Neighbor Interpolation method, instead of the Linear Interpolation which is the default method of interp1:
Y2(i, :) = interp1(X{i}, Y{i}, X2); % linear
Y3(i, :) = interp1(X{i}, Y{i}, X2, 'previous');
This is how it affects the final results:
I solved it using Matlab's perfcurve. For that, I had to pass as a parameter a list of vectors (size vectors 1xn) for "label" and "scores". Thus, the perfcurve function already understands as a set of resolutions made using k-fold and returns the average ROC curve and its confidence interval, in addition to the AUC and its confidence interval.
[X1,Y1,T1,AUC1] = perfcurve(t_test_list,resp_list,1);
t_test and resp they are lists of size 1xk (k is the number of folds / k-fold) and each element of the lists is a 1xn vector with scores and labels.
resp = nnet(x_test(i));
t_test_act = t_test(i);
resp has 2xn format (n is the number of predicted samples). There are two classes.
t_test_act contains the labels of the current set of tests, it has formed 2xn and is composed of 0 and 1 (each column has a 1 and a 0, indicating the true class of the sample).
resp_list{i} = resp(1,:) %(scores)
t_test_list{i} = t_test_act(1,:) %(labels)
[X1,Y1,T1,AUC1] = perfcurve(t_test_list,resp_list,1);
Related
I have a two columns of data. X = Model values of NOx concentrations and Y = Observations of NOx concentrations. Now, I want to scatter plot X, Y (markers varying with colors) as well as the colourbar which would show me the counts (i.e. number of data points in that range). X and Y are daily data for a year, i.e. 365 rows.
Please help me. Any help is greatly appreciated.
I have attached a sample image.
If I understand you correctly, the real problem is creating the color information, which is, creating a bivariate histogram. Luckily, MATLAB has a function, hist3, for that in the Statistics & Machine Learning Toolbox. The syntax is
[N,C] = hist3(X,nbins)
where X is a m-by-2 matrix containing the data, and nbins is a 1-by-2 vector containing the number of bins in each dimension. The return value N is a matrix of size nbins(1)-by-nbins(2), and contains the histogram data. C is a 1-by-2 cell array, containing the bin centers in both dimensions.
% Generate sample data
X = randn(10000, 1);
Y = X + rand(10000, 1);
% Generate histogram
[N,C] = hist3([X,Y], [100,100]);
% Plot
imagesc(C{1},C{2},N);
set(gca,'YDir','normal');
colormap(flipud(pink));
colorbar;
Result:
I'am new in matlab programming,I should Write a script to generate a random sequence (x1,..., XN) of size N following the normal distribution N (0, 1) and calculate the empirical mean mN and variance σN^2
Then,I should plot them:
this is my essai:
function f = normal_distribution(n)
x =randn(n);
muem = 1./n .* (sum(x));
muem
%mean(muem)
vaem = 1./n .* (sum((x).^2));
vaem
hold on
plot(x,muem,'-')
grid on
plot(x,vaem,'*')
NB:those are the formules that I have used:
I have obtained,a Figure and I don't know if is it correct or not ,thanks for Help
From your question, it seems what you want to do is calculate the mean and variance from a sample of size N (nor an NxN matrix) drawn from a standard normal distribution. So you may want to use randn(n, 1), instead of randn(n). Also as #ThP pointed out, it does not make sense to plot mean and variance vs. x. What you could do is to calculate means and variances for inceasing sample sizes n1, n2, ..., nm, and then plot sample size vs. mean or variance, to see them converge to 0 and 1. See the code below:
function [] = plotMnV(nIter)
means = zeros(nIter, 1);
vars = zeros(nIter, 1);
for pow = 1:nIter
n = 2^pow;
x =randn(n, 1);
means(pow) = 1./n * sum(x);
vars(pow) = 1./n * sum(x.^2);
end
plot(1:nIter, means, 'o-');
hold on;
plot(1:nIter, vars, '*-');
end
For example, plotMnV(20) gave me the plot below.
I have the following code for calculating the result of a linear combination of Gaussian functions. What I'd really like to do is to vectorize this somehow so that it's far more performant in Matlab.
Note that y is a column vector (output), x is a matrix where each column corresponds to a data point and each row corresponds to a dimension (i.e. 2 rows = 2D), variance is a double, gaussians is a matrix where each column is a vector corresponding to the mean point of the gaussian and weights is a row vector of the weights in front of each gaussian. Note that the length of weights is 1 bigger than gaussians as weights(1) is the 0th order weight.
function [ y ] = CalcPrediction( gaussians, variance, weights, x )
basisFunctions = size(gaussians, 2);
xvalues = size(x, 2);
if length(weights) ~= basisFunctions + 1
ME = MException('TRAIN:CALC', 'The number of weights should be equal to the number of basis functions plus one');
throw(ME);
end
y = weights(1) * ones(xvalues, 1);
for xIdx = 1:xvalues
for i = 1:basisFunctions
diff = x(:, xIdx) - gaussians(:, i);
y(xIdx) = y(xIdx) + weights(i+1) * exp(-(diff')*diff/(2*variance));
end
end
end
You can see that at the moment I simply iterate over the x vectors and then the gaussians inside 2 for loops. I'm hoping that this can be improved - I've looked at meshgrid but that seems to only apply to vectors (and I have matrices)
Thanks.
Try this
diffx = bsxfun(#minus,x,permute(gaussians,[1,3,2])); % binary operation with singleton expansion
diffx2 = squeeze(sum(diffx.^2,1)); % dot product, shape is now [XVALUES,BASISFUNCTIONS]
weight_col = weights(:); % make sure weights is a column vector
y = exp(-diffx2/2/variance)*weight_col(2:end); % a column vector of length XVALUES
Note, I changed diff to diffx since diff is a builtin. I'm not sure this will improve performance as allocating arrays will offset increase by vectorization.
I have a simple loglog curve as above. Is there some function in Matlab which can fit this curve by segmented lines and show the starting and end points of these line segments ? I have checked the curve fitting toolbox in matlab. They seems to do curve fitting by either one line or some functions. I do not want to curve fitting by one line only.
If there is no direct function, any alternative to achieve the same goal is fine with me. My goal is to fit the curve by segmented lines and get locations of the end points of these segments .
First of all, your problem is not called curve fitting. Curve fitting is when you have data, and you find the best function that describes it, in some sense. You, on the other hand, want to create a piecewise linear approximation of your function.
I suggest the following strategy:
Split manually into sections. The section size should depend on the derivative, large derivative -> small section
Sample the function at the nodes between the sections
Find a linear interpolation that passes through the points mentioned above.
Here is an example of a code that does that. You can see that the red line (interpolation) is very close to the original function, despite the small amount of sections. This happens due to the adaptive section size.
function fitLogLog()
x = 2:1000;
y = log(log(x));
%# Find section sizes, by using an inverse of the approximation of the derivative
numOfSections = 20;
indexes = round(linspace(1,numel(y),numOfSections));
derivativeApprox = diff(y(indexes));
inverseDerivative = 1./derivativeApprox;
weightOfSection = inverseDerivative/sum(inverseDerivative);
totalRange = max(x(:))-min(x(:));
sectionSize = weightOfSection.* totalRange;
%# The relevant nodes
xNodes = x(1) + [ 0 cumsum(sectionSize)];
yNodes = log(log(xNodes));
figure;plot(x,y);
hold on;
plot (xNodes,yNodes,'r');
scatter (xNodes,yNodes,'r');
legend('log(log(x))','adaptive linear interpolation');
end
Andrey's adaptive solution provides a more accurate overall fit. If what you want is segments of a fixed length, however, then here is something that should work, using a method that also returns a complete set of all the fitted values. Could be vectorized if speed is needed.
Nsamp = 1000; %number of data samples on x-axis
x = [1:Nsamp]; %this is your x-axis
Nlines = 5; %number of lines to fit
fx = exp(-10*x/Nsamp); %generate something like your current data, f(x)
gx = NaN(size(fx)); %this will hold your fitted lines, g(x)
joins = round(linspace(1, Nsamp, Nlines+1)); %define equally spaced breaks along the x-axis
dx = diff(x(joins)); %x-change
df = diff(fx(joins)); %f(x)-change
m = df./dx; %gradient for each section
for i = 1:Nlines
x1 = joins(i); %start point
x2 = joins(i+1); %end point
gx(x1:x2) = fx(x1) + m(i)*(0:dx(i)); %compute line segment
end
subplot(2,1,1)
h(1,:) = plot(x, fx, 'b', x, gx, 'k', joins, gx(joins), 'ro');
title('Normal Plot')
subplot(2,1,2)
h(2,:) = loglog(x, fx, 'b', x, gx, 'k', joins, gx(joins), 'ro');
title('Log Log Plot')
for ip = 1:2
subplot(2,1,ip)
set(h(ip,:), 'LineWidth', 2)
legend('Data', 'Piecewise Linear', 'Location', 'NorthEastOutside')
legend boxoff
end
This is not an exact answer to this question, but since I arrived here based on a search, I'd like to answer the related question of how to create (not fit) a piecewise linear function that is intended to represent the mean (or median, or some other other function) of interval data in a scatter plot.
First, a related but more sophisticated alternative using regression, which apparently has some MATLAB code listed on the wikipedia page, is Multivariate adaptive regression splines.
The solution here is to just calculate the mean on overlapping intervals to get points
function [x, y] = intervalAggregate(Xdata, Ydata, aggFun, intStep, intOverlap)
% intOverlap in [0, 1); 0 for no overlap of intervals, etc.
% intStep this is the size of the interval being aggregated.
minX = min(Xdata);
maxX = max(Xdata);
minY = min(Ydata);
maxY = max(Ydata);
intInc = intOverlap*intStep; %How far we advance each iteraction.
if intOverlap <= 0
intInc = intStep;
end
nInt = ceil((maxX-minX)/intInc); %Number of aggregations
parfor i = 1:nInt
xStart = minX + (i-1)*intInc;
xEnd = xStart + intStep;
intervalIndices = find((Xdata >= xStart) & (Xdata <= xEnd));
x(i) = aggFun(Xdata(intervalIndices));
y(i) = aggFun(Ydata(intervalIndices));
end
For instance, to calculate the mean over some paired X and Y data I had handy with intervals of length 0.1 having roughly 1/3 overlap with each other (see scatter image):
[x,y] = intervalAggregate(Xdat, Ydat, #mean, 0.1, 0.333)
x =
Columns 1 through 8
0.0552 0.0868 0.1170 0.1475 0.1844 0.2173 0.2498 0.2834
Columns 9 through 15
0.3182 0.3561 0.3875 0.4178 0.4494 0.4671 0.4822
y =
Columns 1 through 8
0.9992 0.9983 0.9971 0.9955 0.9927 0.9905 0.9876 0.9846
Columns 9 through 15
0.9803 0.9750 0.9707 0.9653 0.9598 0.9560 0.9537
We see that as x increases, y tends to decrease slightly. From there, it is easy enough to draw line segments and/or perform some other kind of smoothing.
(Note that I did not attempt to vectorize this solution; a much faster version could be assumed if Xdata is sorted.)
Imagine a set of data with given x-values (as a column vector) and several y-values combined in a matrix (row vector of column vectors). Some of the values in the matrix are not available:
%% Create the test data
N = 1e2; % Number of x-values
x = 2*sort(rand(N, 1))-1;
Y = [x.^2, x.^3, x.^4, x.^5, x.^6]; % Example values
Y(50:80, 4) = NaN(31, 1); % Some values are not avaiable
Now i have a column vector of new x-values for interpolation.
K = 1e2; % Number of interplolation values
x_i = rand(K, 1);
My goal is to find a fast way to interpolate all y-values for the given x_i values. If there are NaN values in the y-values, I want to use the y-value which is before the missing data. In the example case this would be the data in Y(49, :).
If I use interp1, I get NaN-values and the execution is slow for large x and x_i:
starttime = cputime;
Y_i1 = interp1(x, Y, x_i);
executiontime1 = cputime - starttime
An alternative is interp1q, which is about two times faster.
What is a very fast way which allows my modifications?
Possible ideas:
Do postprocessing of Y_i1 to eliminate NaN-values.
Use a combination of a loop and the find-command to always use the neighbour without interpolation.
Using interp1 with spline interpolation (spline) ignores NaN's.