I have a time series of N data points of sunspots and would like to predict based on a subset of these points the remaining points in the series and then compare the correctness.
I'm just getting introduced to linear prediction using Matlab and so have decided that I would go the route of using the following code segment within a loop so that every point outside of the training set until the end of the given data has a prediction:
%x is the data, training set is some subset of x starting from beginning
%'unknown' is the number of points to extend the prediction over starting from the
%end of the training set (i.e. difference in length of training set and data vectors)
%x_pred is set to x initially
p = length(training_set);
coeffs = lpc(training_set, p);
for i=1:unknown
nextValue = -coeffs(2:end) * x_pred(end-unknown-1+i:-1:end-unknown-1+i-p+1)';
x_pred(end-unknown+i) = nextValue;
end
error = norm(x - x_pred)
I have three questions regarding this:
1) Does this appropriately do what I have described? I ask because my error seems rather large (>100) when predicting over only the last 20 points of a dataset that has hundreds of points.
2) Am I interpreting the second argument of lpc correctly? Namely, that it means the 'order' or rather number of points that you want to use in predicting the next point?
3) If this is there a more efficient, single line function in Matlab that I can call to replace the looping and just compute all necessary predictions for me given some subset of my overall data as a training set?
I tried looking through the lpc Matlab tutorial but it didn't seem to do the prediction as I have described my needs require. I have also been using How to use aryule() in Matlab to extend a number series? as a reference.
So after much deliberation and experimentation I have found the above approach to be correct and there does not appear to be any single Matlab function to do the above work. The large errors experienced are reasonable since I am using a linear prediction algorithm for a problem (i.e. sunspot prediction) that has inherent nonlinear behavior.
Hope this helps anyone else out there working on something similar.
Related
I have a multivariable linear optimization problem that I could use some guidance with on finding an optimal function/code method (Matlab). My problem is as as follows:
I have a set of observed data, I'll call this d(i), which is a 5000x1 vector (# of rows may change).
I have 10 - 100 sets of simulated data, the number of sets is a number I decide on. Each of these sets is also a 5000x1 vector (again, # of rows may change). I'll call these c1(i), c2(i), etc.
I would like to fit the simulated data sets to the observed data set with this equation:
sf1*c1(i) + sf2*c2(i) + sf3*c3(i) sf4*c4(i) + ... = d(i) + error
In this equation, I would like to solve for all of the scale factors (sf) (non-negative constants) and the error. I am assuming I need to set initial values for all the scale factors for this problem to work. I have looked into things like lssqnonneg, but I am unclear on whether that function can solve or optimize for this many variables per equation.
See above - I have also manually input the values of some scale factors and I can get a pretty good fit to the data by hand, but this is impractical for large quantities of simulated data sets.
did you try looking at https://www.mathworks.com/help/stats/linear-regression.html?s_tid=CRUX_lftnav ?
Instead of using c1,c2,...c100 as different vectors better concatenate them into an array 100x5000, say A=[c1;c2;...;c100] this will be needed to make life easier.
Then look for example at ridge regression
Ans= ridge(d,A,k)
where k is the regularization parameter that can be found by cross-validation:
[U,s,V]=svd( A,"econ");
k=gcv(U,diag(s),d,'tsvd');
see the function gcv here https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/52-regtools
I have created an Auto Encoder Neural Network in MATLAB. I have quite large inputs at the first layer which I have to reconstruct through the network's output layer. I cannot use the large inputs as it is,so I convert it to between [0, 1] using sigmf function of MATLAB. It gives me a values of 1.000000 for all the large values. I have tried using setting the format but it does not help.
Is there a workaround to using large values with my auto encoder?
The process of convert your inputs to the range [0,1] is called normalization, however, as you noticed, the sigmf function is not adequate for this task. This link maybe is useful to you.
Suposse that your inputs are given by a matrix of N rows and M columns, where each row represent an input pattern and each column is a feature. If your first column is:
vec =
-0.1941
-2.1384
-0.8396
1.3546
-1.0722
Then you can convert it to the range [0,1] using:
%# get max and min
maxVec = max(vec);
minVec = min(vec);
%# normalize to -1...1
vecNormalized = ((vec-minVec)./(maxVec-minVec))
vecNormalized =
0.5566
0
0.3718
1.0000
0.3052
As #Dan indicates in the comments, another option is to standarize the data. The goal of this process is to scale the inputs to have mean 0 and a variance of 1. In this case, you need to substract the mean value of the column and divide by the standard deviation:
meanVec = mean(vec);
stdVec = std(vec);
vecStandarized = (vec-meanVec)./ stdVec
vecStandarized =
0.2981
-1.2121
-0.2032
1.5011
-0.3839
Before I give you my answer, let's think a bit about the rationale behind an auto-encoder (AE):
The purpose of auto-encoder is to learn, in an unsupervised manner, something about the underlying structure of the input data. How does AE achieves this goal? If it manages to reconstruct the input signal from its output signal (that is usually of lower dimension) it means that it did not lost information and it effectively managed to learn a more compact representation.
In most examples, it is assumed, for simplicity, that both input signal and output signal ranges in [0..1]. Therefore, the same non-linearity (sigmf) is applied both for obtaining the output signal and for reconstructing back the inputs from the outputs.
Something like
output = sigmf( W*input + b ); % compute output signal
reconstruct = sigmf( W'*output + b_prime ); % notice the different constant b_prime
Then the AE learning stage tries to minimize the training error || output - reconstruct ||.
However, who said the reconstruction non-linearity must be identical to the one used for computing the output?
In your case, the assumption that inputs ranges in [0..1] does not hold. Therefore, it seems that you need to use a different non-linearity for the reconstruction. You should pick one that agrees with the actual range of you inputs.
If, for example, your input ranges in (0..inf) you may consider using exp or ().^2 as the reconstruction non-linearity. You may use polynomials of various degrees, log or whatever function you think may fit the spread of your input data.
Disclaimer: I never actually encountered such a case and have not seen this type of solution in literature. However, I believe it makes sense and at least worth trying.
I'm implementing AdaBoost on Matlab. This algorithm requires that in every iteration the weights of each data point in the training set sum up to one.
If I simply use the following normalization v = v / sum(v) I get a vector whose 1-norm is 1 except some numerical error which later leads to the failure of the algorithm.
Is there a matlab function for normalizing a vector so that it's 1-norm is EXACTLY 1?
Assuming you want identical values to be normalised with the same factor, this is not possible. Simple counter example:
v=ones(21,1);
v = v / sum(v);
sum(v)-1
One common way to deal with it, is enforce values sum(v)>=1 or sum(v)<=1 if your algorithm can deal with a derivation to one side:
if sum(v)>1
v=v-eps(v)
end
Alternatively you can try using vpa, but this will drastically increase your computation time.
I'm working on doing a logistic regression using MATLAB for a simple classification problem. My covariate is one continuous variable ranging between 0 and 1, while my categorical response is a binary variable of 0 (incorrect) or 1 (correct).
I'm looking to run a logistic regression to establish a predictor that would output the probability of some input observation (e.g. the continuous variable as described above) being correct or incorrect. Although this is a fairly simple scenario, I'm having some trouble running this in MATLAB.
My approach is as follows: I have one column vector X that contains the values of the continuous variable, and another equally-sized column vector Y that contains the known classification of each value of X (e.g. 0 or 1). I'm using the following code:
[b,dev,stats] = glmfit(X,Y,'binomial','link','logit');
However, this gives me nonsensical results with a p = 1.000, coefficients (b) that are extremely high (-650.5, 1320.1), and associated standard error values on the order of 1e6.
I then tried using an additional parameter to specify the size of my binomial sample:
glm = GeneralizedLinearModel.fit(X,Y,'distr','binomial','BinomialSize',size(Y,1));
This gave me results that were more in line with what I expected. I extracted the coefficients, used glmval to create estimates (Y_fit = glmval(b,[0:0.01:1],'logit');), and created an array for the fitting (X_fit = linspace(0,1)). When I overlaid the plots of the original data and the model using figure, plot(X,Y,'o',X_fit,Y_fit'-'), the resulting plot of the model essentially looked like the lower 1/4th of the 'S' shaped plot that is typical with logistic regression plots.
My questions are as follows:
1) Why did my use of glmfit give strange results?
2) How should I go about addressing my initial question: given some input value, what's the probability that its classification is correct?
3) How do I get confidence intervals for my model parameters? glmval should be able to input the stats output from glmfit, but my use of glmfit is not giving correct results.
Any comments and input would be very useful, thanks!
UPDATE (3/18/14)
I found that mnrval seems to give reasonable results. I can use [b_fit,dev,stats] = mnrfit(X,Y+1); where Y+1 simply makes my binary classifier into a nominal one.
I can loop through [pihat,lower,upper] = mnrval(b_fit,loopVal(ii),stats); to get various pihat probability values, where loopVal = linspace(0,1) or some appropriate input range and `ii = 1:length(loopVal)'.
The stats parameter has a great correlation coefficient (0.9973), but the p values for b_fit are 0.0847 and 0.0845, which I'm not quite sure how to interpret. Any thoughts? Also, why would mrnfit work over glmfit in my example? I should note that the p-values for the coefficients when using GeneralizedLinearModel.fit were both p<<0.001, and the coefficient estimates were quite different as well.
Finally, how does one interpret the dev output from the mnrfit function? The MATLAB document states that it is "the deviance of the fit at the solution vector. The deviance is a generalization of the residual sum of squares." Is this useful as a stand-alone value, or is this only compared to dev values from other models?
It sounds like your data may be linearly separable. In short, that means since your input data is one dimensional, that there is some value of x such that all values of x < xDiv belong to one class (say y = 0) and all values of x > xDiv belong to the other class (y = 1).
If your data were two-dimensional this means you could draw a line through your two-dimensional space X such that all instances of a particular class are on one side of the line.
This is bad news for logistic regression (LR) as LR isn't really meant to deal with problems where the data are linearly separable.
Logistic regression is trying to fit a function of the following form:
This will only return values of y = 0 or y = 1 when the expression within the exponential in the denominator is at negative infinity or infinity.
Now, because your data is linearly separable, and Matlab's LR function attempts to find a maximum likelihood fit for the data, you will get extreme weight values.
This isn't necessarily a solution, but try flipping the labels on just one of your data points (so for some index t where y(t) == 0 set y(t) = 1). This will cause your data to no longer be linearly separable and the learned weight values will be dragged dramatically closer to zero.
We recently studied the Naïve Bayesian Classifier in our Machine Learning class and now I'm trying to implement it on the Fisher Iris dataset as a self-exercise. The concept is easy and straightforward, with some trickiness involved for continuous attributes. I read up several literature resources which recommended using a Gaussian approximation to compute probability of test data values, so I'm going with it in my code.
Now I'm trying to run it initially for 50% training and 50% test data samples, but something is missing. The current code is always predicting class 1 (I used integers to represent the classes) for all test samples, which is obviously wrong.
My guess is that the problem may be due to normalization being omitted by the code? Though I think adding normalization would still yield proportionate results, and so far my attempts to normalize have produced the same classification results.
Can someone please suggest if there is anything obvious missing here? Or if I'm not approaching this right? Since most of the code is 'mechanics', I have made prominent (****************) the 2 lines that are responsible for the calculations. Any help is appreciated, thanks!
nsamples=75; % 50% samples
% acquire training set and test set
[trainingSample,idx] = datasample(data,nsamples,'Replace',false);
testData = data(setdiff(1:150,idx),:);
% define Gaussian function
%***********************************************************%
Phi=#(mu,sig2,x) (1/sqrt(2*pi*sig2))*exp(-((x-mu)^2)/2*sig2);
%***********************************************************%
for c=1:3 % for 3 classes in training set
clear y x mu sig2;
index=1;
for i=1 : length(trainingSample)
if trainingSample(i,5)==c
y(index,:)=trainingSample(i,:); % filter current class samples
index=index+1; % for conditional probabilities
end
end
for j=1:size(testData,1) % iterate over test samples
clear pf p;
for i=1:4 % iterate over columns
x=testData(j,i); % representing attributes
mu=mean(y(:,i));
sig2=var(y(:,i));
pf(i) = Phi(mu,sig2,x); % calc conditional probability
end
% calc class likelihood; prior * posterior
%*****************************************************%
pc(j,c) = size(y,1)/nsamples * pf(1)*pf(2)*pf(3)*pf(4);
%*****************************************************%
end
end
% find the predicted class for each test sample
% by taking the max probability calculated
for i=1:size(pc,1)
[~,q]=max(pc(i,:));
predicted(i)=q;
actual(i)=testData(i,5);
end
Normalization shouldn't be necessary since the features are only compared to each other.
p(class|thing) = p(class)p(thing|class) =
= p(class)p(feature_1|class)p(feature_2|class)...p(feature_N|class)
So when fitting the parameters for the distribution feature_i|class it will just rescale the parameters (for the new "scale") in this case (mu, sigma2), but the probabilities will remain the same.
It's hard to read the matlab code due to alot of indexing and splitting of training/testing etc. Which is a possible problem source.
You should try something with a lot less non-necessary stuff around it (I would recommend python with scikit-learn for example, alot of helpers for splitting data and such http://scikit-learn.org/).
It's really important that you separate the training and test data, and only train the model with training data and test the trained model with the test data. (Is this done?)
Next step is to check the parameters which is easiest done with either printing them out (sanity check) or..
for each feature render the gaussian bells fitted next to a histogram of the data to see that they match (remember that each histogram bar must be of height number_of_samples_within_range/total_number_of_samples.
Visualising the data and the model is really important to know what is happening.