Consider a dataset A which has examples for training in a binary classification problem. I have used SVM and applied the weighted method (in MATLAB) since the dataset is highly imbalanced. I have applied weights as inversely proportional to the frequency of data in each class. This is done on training using the command
fitcsvm(trainA, trainTarg , ...
'KernelFunction', 'RBF', 'KernelScale', 'auto', ...
'BoxConstraint', C,'Weight',weightTrain );
I have used 10 folds cross-validation for training and learned the hyperparameter as well. so, inside CV the dataset A is split into train (trainA) and validation sets (valA). After training is over and outside the CV loop, I get the confusion matrix on A:
80025 1
0 140
where the first row is for the majority class and the second row is for the minority class. There is only 1 false positive (FP) and all minority class examples have been correctly classified giving true positive (TP) = 140.
PROBLEM: Then, I run the trained model on a new unseen test data set B which was never seen during training. This is the confusion matrix for testing on B .
50075 0
100 0
As can be seen, the minority class has not been classified at all, hence the purpose of weights has failed. Although, there is no FP the SVM fails to capture the minority class examples.
I have not applied any weights or balancing method such as sampling (SMOTE, RUSBoost etc) on B. What could be wrong and how to overcome this problem?
Class misclassification weights could be set instead of sample weights!
You can set the class weights based on the following example.
Mis-classification weight for class A(n-records; dominant) into class B (m-records; minority class) can be n/m.
Mis-classification weight For class B as class A can be set as 1 or m/n based on the severity, which you want to impose on the learning
c=[0 2.2;1 0];
mod=fitcsvm(X,Y,'Cost',c)
According to documentation:
For two-class learning, if you specify a cost matrix, then the
software updates the prior probabilities by incorporating the
penalties described in the cost matrix. Consequently, the cost matrix
resets to the default. For more details on the relationships and
algorithmic behavior of BoxConstraint, Cost, Prior, Standardize, and
Weights, see Algorithms.
Area Under Curve (AUC) is usually used to measure performance of models that applied on unbalanced data. It is also good to plot ROC curve to visually get more insights. Using only confusion matrix for such models may lead to misinterpretation.
perfcurve from the Statistics and Machine Learning Toolbox provides both functionalities.
Related
i'm working on my thesis and i used a Catboost classifier to perform a binary analysis on a very unbalanced dataset:
class0 = x number of samples
class1 = 10*x number of samples
In order to optimize the performance of the model i changed the weights of the classes, giving an higher weight to the minority class, and then i performed a grid search cross validation in which it is searched the set of hyperparameters that reduces the crossentropy loss associated to the catboost model.
At this point i also changed the classificaiton threshold by maximizing the G-mean metric (sqruare root of sensitivity multiplied by specificity).
In you opinion, if you are experts or informed about ensemble methods of type boosting, is it right to procede in this way to increase the performance of the model when the dataset is unbalanced? Maybe it would be enough just to change the weights and use the grid search instead of changing also the classification threshold?
Thank you in advance!
I am struggling in understanding why the matlab function fitcenseble doesn't allow to create an ensemble model using knn learners with bagging, but only with the random subspace method, which is more similar to the random forest one.
I would like to use bagging in order to compare the bagging method using different types of learners (e.g., knn and trees).
I hope you will help me, thank you in advance,
Marta
Bagging is rarely used in conjunction with k-nn classifiers, as the decision surfaces are typically too stable and any multiples of datapoints in the bootstrap sample do not shift the 'weight' like in many other models. Paraphrasing (1):
The probability that any single datapoint appears at least once in a bootstrap sample is ~0.632. Consider a simple 2-class 1-NN classifier bagged with N bootstrap samples. A test datapoint can change classification only if its nearest neighbours in the learning set is not in at least half of the N bootstrap samples. The probability for this to occur is the same as the probability of flipping a weighted coin with a 0.632 probability for heads N times and getting less than 0.5N heads. As N gets larger this probability gets smaller and smaller. Similiar logic holds for multiclass problems and k-NN.
If you want to create your own bagging models you can do it with bootstrp. bootstrp() can be called without a function by calling:
[~, BootIndices] = bootstrap(N, [], Data);
BootSample = Data(BootIndices);
(1) Breiman, Leo. "Bagging predictors." Machine learning 24.2 (1996):
123-140. Chapter 6.4.
My goal is to classify an image using multi class linear SVM (with out kernel). I would like to write my own SVM classifier
I am using MATLAB and have trained linear SVM using image sets provided.
I have around 20 classes, 5 images in each class (total of 100 images) and I am using one-versus-all strategy.
Each image is a (112,92) matrix. That means 112*92=10304 values.
I am using quadprog(H,f,A,C) to solve the quadratic equation (y=w'x+b) in the SVM. One call to quadprog returns w vector of size 10304 for one image. That means I have to call quadprog for 100 times.
The problem is one quadprog call takes 35 secs to get executed. That means for 100 images it will take 3500 secs. This might be due to large size of vectors and matrices involved.
I want to reduce the execution time of quadprog. Is there any way to do it?
First of all, when you do classification using SVM, you usually extract a feature (like HOG) of an image, so that the dimensionality of space on which SVM has to operate gets reduced. You are using raw pixel values, which generates a 10304-D vector. That is not good. Use some standard feature.
Secondly, you do not call quadprog 100 times. You call only once. The concept behind the optimization is, you want to find a weight vector w and a bias b such that it satisfies w'x_i+b=y_i for all images (i.e. all x_i). Note that i will go from 1 to the number of examples in your training set, but w and b stay the same. If you wanted a (w,b) that will satisfy only one x, you do not need any fancy optimization. So stack your x in a big matrix of dimension NxD, y will be a vector of Nx1, and then call quadprog. It will take a longer time than 35 seconds, but you do it only once. This is called training an SVM. While testing for a new image, you just extract its feature, and do w*x+b to get its class.
Third, unless you are doing this as an exercise to understand SVMs, quadprog is not the best way to solve this problem. You need to use some other techniques which work well with large data, for example, Sequential Minimal Optimization.
How can one linear hyperplane classify more than 2 classes: For multi-class classification, SVMs usually use two popular approaches:
One-vs-one SVM: For a C class problem, you train C(C-1)/2 classifiers and at test time, you test that many classifiers and choose the class which receives most votes.
One-vs-all SVM: As name suggests, you train one classifier per class with positive samples from that class and negative samples from all other classes.
From LIBSVM FAQs:
It is one-against-one. We chose it after doing the following comparison: C.-W. Hsu and C.-J. Lin. A comparison of methods for multi-class support vector machines , IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 13(2002), 415-425.
"1-against-the rest" is a good method whose performance is comparable to "1-against-1." We do the latter simply because its training time is shorter.
However, also note that a naive implementation of one-vs-one may not be practical for large-scale problems. LIBSVM website also lists this shortcoming and provides an extension.
LIBLINEAR does not support one-versus-one multi-classification, so we provide an extension here. If k is the number of classes, we generate k(k-1)/2 models, each of which involves only two classes of training data. According to Yuan et al. (2012), one-versus-one is not practical for large-scale linear classification because of the huge space needed to store k(k-1)/2 models. However, this approach may still be viable if model vectors (i.e., weight vectors) are very sparse. Our implementation stores models in a sparse form and can effectively handle some large-scale data.
Why is h2o.randomforest calculating MSE on Out of bag sample and while training for a multinomail classification problem?
I have done binary classification also using h2o.randomforest, there it used to calculate AUC on out of bag sample and while training but for multi classification random forest is calculating MSE which seems suspicious. Please see this screenshot.
My target variable was a factor containing 4 factor levels model1, model2, model3 and model4. In the screenshot you would also a confusion matrix for these factors.
Can someone please explain this behaviour?
Both binomial and multinomial classification display MSE, so you will see it in the Scoring History table for both models (highlighted training_MSE column).
H2O does not evaluate a multinomial AUC. A few evaluation methods exist, but there is not yet a single widely adopted method. The pROC package discusses the method of Hand and Till, but mentions that it cannot be plotted and results rarely tested. Log loss and classification error are still available, specific to classification, as each has standard methods of evaluation in a multinomial context.
There is a confusion matrix comparing your 4 factor levels, as you highlighted. Can you clarify what more you are expecting? If you were looking for four individual confusion matrices, the four-column table contains enough information that they could be computed.
I am new to using Matlab and am trying to follow the example in the Bioinformatics Toolbox documentation (SVM Classification with Cross Validation) to handle a classification problem.
However, I am not able to understand Step 9, which says:
Set up a function that takes an input z=[rbf_sigma,boxconstraint], and returns the cross-validation value of exp(z).
The reason to take exp(z) is twofold:
rbf_sigma and boxconstraint must be positive.
You should look at points spaced approximately exponentially apart.
This function handle computes the cross validation at parameters
exp([rbf_sigma,boxconstraint]):
minfn = #(z)crossval('mcr',cdata,grp,'Predfun', ...
#(xtrain,ytrain,xtest)crossfun(xtrain,ytrain,...
xtest,exp(z(1)),exp(z(2))),'partition',c);
What is the function that I should be implementing here? Is it exp or minfn? I will appreciate if you can give me the code for this section. Thanks.
I will like to know what does it mean when it says exp([rbf_sigma,boxconstraint])
rbf_sigma: The svm is using a gaussian kernel, the rbf_sigma set the standard deviation (~size) of the kernel. To understand how kernels work, the SVM is putting the kernel around every sample (so that you have a gaussian around every sample). Then the kernels are added up (sumed) for the samples of each category/type. At each point the type which sum is higher would be the "winner". For example if type A has a higher sum of these kernels at point X, then if you have a new datum to classify in point X, it will be classified as type A. (there are other configuration parameters that may change the actual threshold where a category is selected over another)
Fig. Analyze this figure from the webpage you gave us. You can see how by adding up the gaussian kernels on the red samples "sumA", and on the green samples "sumB"; it is logical that sumA>sumB in the center part of the figure. It is also logical that sumB>sumA in the outer part of the image.
boxconstraint: it is a cost/penalty over miss-classified data. During the training stage of the classifier, where you use the training data to adjust the SVM parameters, the training algorithm is using an error function to decide how to optimize the SVM parameters in an iterative fashion. The cost for a miss-classified sample is proportional to how far it is from the boundary where it would have been classified correctly. In the figure that I am attaching the boundary is the inner blue circumference.
Taking into account BGreene indications and from what I understand of the tutorial:
In the tutorial they advice to try values for rbf_sigma and boxconstraint that are exponentially apart. This means that you should compare values like {0.2, 2, 20, ...} (note that this is {2*10^(i-2), i=1,2,3,...}), and NOT like {0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5} (which would be linearly apart). They advice this to try a wide range of values first. You can further optimize later FROM the first optimum that you obtained before.
The command "[searchmin fval] = fminsearch(minfn,randn(2,1),opts)" will give you back the optimum values for rbf_sigma and boxconstraint. Probably you have to use exp(z) because it affects how fminsearch increments the values of z(1) and z(2) during the search for the optimum value. I suppose that when you put exp(z(1)) in the definition of #minfn, then fminsearch will take 'exponentially' big steps.
In machine learning, always try to understand that there are three subsets in your data: training data, cross-validation data, and test data. The training set is used to optimize the parameters of the SVM classifier for EACH value of rbf_sigma and boxconstraint. Then the cross validation set is used to select the optimum value of the parameters rbf_sigma and boxconstraint. And finally the test data is used to obtain an idea of the performance of your classifier (the efficiency of the classifier is determined upon the test set).
So, if you start with 10000 samples you may divide the data for example as training(50%), cross-validation(25%), test(25%). So that you will sample randomly 5000 samples for the training set, then 2500 samples from the 5000 remaining samples for the cross-validation set, and the rest of samples (that is 2500) would be separated for the test set.
I hope that I could clarify your doubts. By the way, if you are interested in the optimization of the parameters of classifiers and machine learning algorithms I strongly suggest that you follow this free course -> www.ml-class.org (it is awesome, really).
You need to implement a function called crossfun (see example).
The function handle minfn is passed to fminsearch to be minimized.
exp([rbf_sigma,boxconstraint]) is the quantity being optimized to minimize classification error.
There are a number of functions nested within this function handle:
- crossval is producing the classification error based on cross validation using partition c
- crossfun - classifies data using an SVM
- fminsearch - optimizes SVM hyperparameters to minimize classification error
Hope this helps