I am working with a matrix of data, in matlab, with dimensions n-by-m where ('n' are the number of regressors = 61) and ('m' is the number of datapoints = 500). I have reasons to suspect that the data is highly collinear. I have been reading in the topic of 'Collinearity' and I come to realize that there are many valid options that can be used (e.g. Principal Component analysis).
Starting by the simplest approach, I tried to implement PCA. However, what PCA gives me is the following output: Principal Components, Latent Variables, POV (Percentage of Variance). I basicly creat the principal component space for my data
My question is the following, How can I, after obtaining the principal component space, convert the variables that I have (PC, Lat, POV) into the time space constraint to the relevent components (typical those that explain 99% of the variance)? In other words, how can my data reflect the PCA analysis?
Many thanks in advance
Related
I am attempting to run a pointwise multiple linear regression in Matlab, i.e., to obtain a regression coefficient for each point in my dataset.
I have three independent variables and one dependent variable. Each variable is a column vector with ~1.6 million records. Each data point represents a geographic location; my point in doing all this is to try and see the effects of the predictor variables on the response variable on a pixel-per-pixel basis.
I have already successfully run fitlm, regress, and mldivide; these functions get me the three regression coefficients for my data. However, I want to run a multiple regression through all my points independently, so that ultimately I will get three columns of regression coefficients of 1.6 million records each.
My data contains some NaN. These rows cannot be ignored; the final column vector must be the same size as the original vectors since the data point's location is related to real-world coordinates.
I've looked into the code for bsxfun but don't believe it can help me. I also tried using dot notation but that didn't work. My thinking now is to create a for loop and use mldivide one row at a time. However, when I tried using 'regress' on scalars (mocking one row of data), I got the error "X is rank deficient to within machine precision." I didn't get this error when I used mldivide.
Is doing a pointwise multiple linear regression even possible? It seems to me that my sample size is way too small. Any feedback on the feasibility of this, and whether a for loop is a good direction to pursue, would be greatly appreciated.
I understand the concept of PCA, and what it's doing, but trying to apply the concept to my application is proving difficult.
I have a 1 by X matrix of a physiological signal (it's not EMG, but very similar, so think of it as EMG if it helps) which contains various noise and artefacts. What I've noticed of the noise is that some of it is very large and I would assume after PCA this would be the largest principal component, thus my idea of using PCA for some dimensional reduction.
My problem is that with a 1 by X matrix there is no covariance matrix, only the variance, and thus eigenvectors and all of PCA falls through.
I know I need to rearrange my data into a matrix more than 1D, but this is where I need some suggestions. Do I split my data into windows of equal length to create a large dimensional matrix which I can apply PCA to? Do I perform several trials of the same action so I have lots of data sets (this would be impractical for my application)?
Any suggestions or examples would be helpful. I'm using MATLAB to perform this task.
I have a 40X3249 noisy dataset and 40X1 resultset. I want to perform simple sequential feature selection on it, in Matlab. Matlab example is complicated and I can't follow it. Even a few examples on SoF didn't help. I want to use decision tree as classifier to perform feature selection. Can someone please explain in simple terms.
Also is it a problem that my dataset has very low number of observations compared to the number of features?
I am following this example: Sequential feature selection Matlab and I am getting error like this:
The pooled covariance matrix of TRAINING must be positive definite.
I've explained the error message you're getting in answers to your previous questions.
In general, it is a problem that you have many more variables than samples. This will prevent you using some techniques, such as the discriminant analysis you were attempting, but it's a problem anyway. The fact is that if you have that high a ratio of variables to samples, it is very likely that some combination of variables would perfectly classify your dataset even if they were all random numbers. That's true if you build a single decision tree model, and even more true if you are using a feature selection method to explicitly search through combinations of variables.
I would suggest you try some sort of dimensionality reduction method. If all of your variables are continuous, you could try PCA as suggested by #user1207217. Alternatively you could use a latent variable method for model-building, such as PLS (plsregress in MATLAB).
If you're still intent on using sequential feature selection with a decision tree on this dataset, then you should be able to modify the example in the question you linked to, replacing the call to classify with one to classregtree.
This error comes from the use of the classify function in that question, which is performing LDA. This error occurs when the data is rank deficient (or in other words, some features are almost exactly correlated). In order to overcome this, you should project the data down to a lower dimensional subspace. Principal component analysis can do this for you. See here for more details on how to use pca function within statistics toolbox of Matlab.
[basis, scores, ~] = pca(X); % Find the basis functions and their weighting, X is row vectors
indices = find(scores > eps(2*max(scores))); % This is to find irrelevant components up to machine precision of the biggest component .. with a litte extra tolerance (2x)
new_basis = basis(:, indices); % This gets us the relevant components, which are stored in variable "basis" as column vectors
X_new = X*new_basis; % inner products between the new basis functions spanning some subspace of the original, and the original feature vectors
This should get you automatic projections down into a relevant subspace. Note that your features won't have the same meaning as before, because they will be weighted combinations of the old features.
Extra note: If you don't want to change your feature representation, then instead of classify, you need to use something which works with rank deficient data. You could roll your own version of penalised discriminant analysis (which is quite simple), use support vector machines, or other classification functions which don't break with correlated features as LDA does (by virtue of requiring matrix inversion of the covariance estimate).
EDIT: P.S I haven't tested this, because I have rolled my own version of PCA in Matlab.
I have a dataset of n data, where each data is represented by a set of extracted features. Generally, the clustering algorithms need that all input data have the same dimensions (the same number of features), that is, the input data X is a n*d matrix of n data points each of which has d features.
In my case, I've previously extracted some features from my data but the number of extracted features for each data is most likely to be different (I mean, I have a dataset X where data points have not the same number of features).
Is there any way to adapt them, in order to cluster them using some common clustering algorithms requiring data to be of the same dimensions.
Thanks
Sounds like the problem you have is that it's a 'sparse' data set. There are generally two options.
Reduce the dimensionality of the input data set using multi-dimensional scaling techniques. For example Sparse SVD (e.g. Lanczos algorithm) or sparse PCA. Then apply traditional clustering on the dense lower dimensional outputs.
Directly apply a sparse clustering algorithm, such as sparse k-mean. Note you can probably find a PDF of this paper if you look hard enough online (try scholar.google.com).
[Updated after problem clarification]
In the problem, a handwritten word is analyzed visually for connected components (lines). For each component, a fixed number of multi-dimensional features is extracted. We need to cluster the words, each of which may have one or more connected components.
Suggested solution:
Classify the connected components first, into 1000(*) unique component classifications. Then classify the words against the classified components they contain (a sparse problem described above).
*Note, the exact number of component classifications you choose doesn't really matter as long as it's high enough as the MDS analysis will reduce them to the essential 'orthogonal' classifications.
There are also clustering algorithms such as DBSCAN that in fact do not care about your data. All this algorithm needs is a distance function. So if you can specify a distance function for your features, then you can use DBSCAN (or OPTICS, which is an extension of DBSCAN, that doesn't need the epsilon parameter).
So the key question here is how you want to compare your features. This doesn't have much to do with clustering, and is highly domain dependant. If your features are e.g. word occurrences, Cosine distance is a good choice (using 0s for non-present features). But if you e.g. have a set of SIFT keypoints extracted from a picture, there is no obvious way to relate the different features with each other efficiently, as there is no order to the features (so one could compare the first keypoint with the first keypoint etc.) A possible approach here is to derive another - uniform - set of features. Typically, bag of words features are used for such a situation. For images, this is also known as visual words. Essentially, you first cluster the sub-features to obtain a limited vocabulary. Then you can assign each of the original objects a "text" composed of these "words" and use a distance function such as cosine distance on them.
I see two options here:
Restrict yourself to those features for which all your data-points have a value.
See if you can generate sensible default values for missing features.
However, if possible, you should probably resample all your data-points, so that they all have values for all features.
I have a set of 100 observations where each observation has 45 characteristics. And each one of those observations have a label attached which I want to predict based on those 45 characteristics. So it's an input matrix with the dimension 45 x 100 and a target matrix with the dimension 1 x 100.
The thing is that I want to know how many of those 45 characteristics are relevant in my set of data, basically the principal component analysis, and I understand that I can do this with Matlab function processpca.
Could you please tell me how can I do this? Suppose that the input matrix is x with 45 rows and 100 columns and y is a vector with 100 elements.
Assuming that you want to construct a model of the 1x100 vector, based on the 45x100 matrix, I am not convinced that PCA will do what you think. PCA can be used to select variables for model estimation, but this is a somewhat indirect way to gather a set of model features. Anyway, I suggest reading both:
Principal Components Analysis
and...
Putting PCA to Work
...both of which provide code in MATLAB not requiring any Toolboxes.
Have you tried COEFF = princomp(x)?
COEFF = princomp(X) performs principal
components analysis (PCA) on the
n-by-p data matrix X, and returns the
principal component coefficients, also
known as loadings. Rows of X
correspond to observations, columns to
variables. COEFF is a p-by-p matrix,
each column containing coefficients
for one principal component. The
columns are in order of decreasing
component variance.
From your question I deduced you don't need to do it in MATLAB, but you just want to analyze your dataset. According to my opinion the key is visualization of the dependencies.
If you're not forced to do the analysis in MATLAB I'd suggest you try more specialized software something like WEKA (www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka/) or RapidMiner (rapid-i.com). Both tools can provide PCA and other dimension reduction algorithms + they contain nice visualization tools.
Your use case sounds like a combination of Classification and Feature Selection.
Statistics Toolbox offers a lot of good capabilities in this area. The toolbox provides access to a number of classification algorithms including
Naive Bayes Classifiers Bagged
Decision Trees (aka Random Forests)
Binomial and Multinominal logistic regression
Linear Discriminant analysis
You also have a variety of options available for feature selection include
sequentialfs (forwards and backwards feature selection)
relifF
"treebagger" also supports options for feature selection and estimating variable importance.
Alternatively, you can use some of Optimization Toolbox's capabilities to write your own custom equations to estimate variable importance.
A couple monthes back, I did a webinar for The MathWorks titled "Compuational Statistics: Getting Started with Classification using MTALAB". You can watch the Webinar at
http://www.mathworks.com/company/events/webinars/wbnr51468.html?id=51468&p1=772996255&p2=772996273
The code and the data set for the examples is available at MATLAB Central
http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/28770
With all this said and done, many people using Principal Component Analysis as a pre-processing step before applying classification algorithms. PCA gets used alot
When you need to extract features from images
When you're worried about multicollinearity
You should find correlation matrix. in the following example matlab finds correlation matrix with 'corr' function
http://www.mathworks.com/help/stats/feature-transformation.html#f75476