Avoiding duplication in R - r

I am trying to fit a variety of (truncated) probability distributions to the same very thin set of quantiles. I can do it but it seems to require lots of duplication of the same code. Is there a neater way?
I am using this code by Nadarajah and Kotz to generate the pdf of the truncated distributions:
qtrunc <- function(p, spec, a = -Inf, b = Inf, ...)
{
tt <- p
G <- get(paste("p", spec, sep = ""), mode = "function")
Gin <- get(paste("q", spec, sep = ""), mode = "function")
tt <- Gin(G(a, ...) + p*(G(b, ...) - G(a, ...)), ...)
return(tt)
}
where spec can be the name of any untruncated distribution for which code in R exists, and the ... argument is used to provide the names of the parameters of that untruncated distribution.
To achieve the best fit I need to measure the distance between the given quantiles and those calculated using arbitrary values of the parameters of the distribution. In the case of the gamma distribution, for example, the code is as follows:
spec <- "gamma"
fit_gamma <- function(x, l = 0, h = 20, t1 = 5, t2 = 13){
ct1 <- qtrunc(p = 1/3, spec, a = l, b = h, shape = x[1],rate = x[2])
ct2 <- qtrunc(p = 2/3, spec, a = l, b = h, shape = x[1],rate = x[2])
dist <- vector(mode = "numeric", length = 2)
dist[1] <- (t1 - ct1)^2
dist[2] <- (t2- ct2)^2
return(sqrt(sum(dist)))
}
where l is the lower truncation, h is the higher and I am given the two tertiles t1 and t2.
Finally, I seek the best fit using optim, thus:
gamma_fit <- optim(par = c(2, 4),
fn = fit_gamma,
l = l,
h = h,
t1 = t1,
t2 = t2,
method = "L-BFGS-B",
lower = c(1.01, 1.4)
Now suppose I want to do the same thing but fitting a normal distribution instead. The names of the parameters of the normal distribution that I am using in R are mean and sd.
I can achieve what I want but only by writing a whole new function fit_normal that is extremely similar to my fit_gamma function but with the new parameter names used in the definition of ct1 and ct2.
The problem of duplication of code becomes very severe because I wish to try fitting a large number of different distributions to my data.
What I want to know is whether there is a way of writing a generic fit_spec as it were so that the parameter names do not have to be written out by me.

Use x as a named list to create a list of arguments to pass into qtrunc() using do.call().
fit_distro <- function(x, spec, l = 0, h = 20, t1 = 5, t2 = 13){
args <- c(x, list(spec = spec, a = l, b = h))
ct1 <- do.call(qtrunc, args = c(list(p = 1/3), args))
ct2 <- do.call(qtrunc, args = c(list(p = 2/3), args))
dist <- vector(mode = "numeric", length = 2)
dist[1] <- (t1 - ct1)^2
dist[2] <- (t2 - ct2)^2
return(sqrt(sum(dist)))
}
This is called as follows, which is the same as your original function.
fit_distro(list(shape = 2, rate = 3), "gamma")
# [1] 13.07425
fit_gamma(c(2, 3))
# [1] 13.07425
This will work with other distributions, for however many parameters they have.
fit_distro(list(mean = 10, sd = 3), "norm")
# [1] 4.08379
fit_distro(list(shape1 = 2, shape2 = 3, ncp = 10), "beta")
# [1] 12.98371

Related

Number of items to replace is not a multiple of replacement length - Datacamp

I follow some classes in DataCamp about R and sometimes when I replicate the code from datacamp to R-studio, I have issues but usually, I find the answer here or generally online. However, this time I cannot understand what is the mistake or how to fix it. I copy paste the code from datacamp
# Compute cross-validated errors for up to 8 steps ahead
e <- matrix(NA_real_, nrow = 1000, ncol = 8)
for(h in 1:8)
e[, h] <- tsCV(goog, forecastfunction = naive, h = h)
# Compute the MSE values and remove missing values
mse <- colMeans(e^2, na.rm = TRUE)
# Plot the MSE values against the forecast horizon
data.frame(h = 1:8, MSE = mse) %>% ggplot(aes(x = h, y = MSE)) + geom_point()
When I add this code to R-studio (including the demanded packages) I always get the following error:
**Error in e[, h] <- tsCV(goog, forecastfunction = naive, h = h) :
number of items to replace is not a multiple of replacement length**
Does anybody know why does this happen?
The problem here is when h=1 the tsCV will return only one column when h=2 it will provide two columns h=1 and h=2 similarly if h=8 it will return 8 columns h=1,...h=8. The following code will solve the problem but we will not be able to find values for h=1 with the loop (because tsCV(goog, forecastfunction = naive, h = 1) will be a vector and [,1] will be an incorrect number of dimensions) so we will calculate it separately:
library(forecast)
library(fpp2)
e <- matrix(data = NA, nrow = 1000, ncol =8)
for(h in 2:8){
e[, h] <- tsCV(goog, forecastfunction = naive, h = h)[,h]
}
e[,1]<- tsCV(goog, forecastfunction = naive, h = 1)
# Compute the MSE values and remove missing values
mse <- colMeans(e^2, na.rm = TRUE)
# Plot the MSE values against the forecast horizon
data.frame(h = 1:8, MSE = mse) %>% ggplot(aes(x = h, y = MSE)) + geom_point()
note that:
tsCV stands for Time series cross-validation from forecast package
goog is a data set from fpp2 package
when you set tsCV(h = n), it is returns n columns and calculate all values 1:n.
You can simply change your code to
# Compute cross-validated errors for up to 8 steps ahead
e <- matrix(NA_real_, nrow = 1000, ncol = 8)
e <- tsCV(goog, forecastfunction = naive, h = 8)
# Compute the MSE values and remove missing values
mse <- colMeans(e^2, na.rm = TRUE)
# Plot the MSE values against the forecast horizon
data.frame(h = 1:8, MSE = mse) %>%
ggplot(aes(x = h, y = MSE)) + geom_point()
If you want to know more about the tsCV function, below is the function code
function (y, forecastfunction, h = 1, window = NULL, ...)
{
y <- as.ts(y)
n <- length(y)
e <- ts(matrix(NA_real_, nrow = n, ncol = h))
tsp(e) <- tsp(y)
for (i in seq_len(n - 1)) {
fc <- try(suppressWarnings(forecastfunction(subset(y,
start = ifelse(is.null(window), 1L, ifelse(i - window >=
0L, i - window + 1L, stop("small window"))),
end = i), h = h, ...)), silent = TRUE)
if (!is.element("try-error", class(fc))) {
e[i, ] <- y[i + (1:h)] - fc$mean
}
}
if (h == 1) {
return(e[, 1L])
}
else {
colnames(e) <- paste("h=", 1:h, sep = "")
return(e)
}
}
<bytecode: 0x10e17fe70>
<environment: namespace:forecast>

Vectorized R function to produce sets of histograms

I have a vectorized R function (see below). At each run, the function plots two histograms. My goal is that when argument n is a vector (see example of use below), the function plots length of n separate sets of these histograms (ex: if n is a vector of length 2, I expected two sets of histograms i.e., 4 individual histograms)?
I have tried the following with no success. Is there a way to do this?
t.sim = Vectorize(function(n, es, n.sim){
d = numeric(n.sim)
p = numeric(n.sim)
for(i in 1:n.sim){
N = sqrt((n^2)/(2*n))
x = rnorm(n, es, 1)
y = rnorm(n, 0, 1)
a = t.test(x, y, var.equal = TRUE)
d[i] = a[[1]]/N
p[i] = a[[3]]
}
par(mfcol = c(2, length(n)))
hist(p) ; hist(d)
}, "n")
# Example of use:
t.sim(n = c(30, 300), es = .1, n.sim = 1e3) # `n` is a vector of `2` so I expect
# 4 histograms in my graphical device
Vectorize seems to be based on mapply, which would essentially call the function numerous times while cycle through your inputs vector. Hence, the easier way out probably just calls it outside the function
t.sim = Vectorize(function(n, es, n.sim){
d = numeric(n.sim)
p = numeric(n.sim)
for(i in 1:n.sim){
N = sqrt((n^2)/(2*n))
x = rnorm(n, es, 1)
y = rnorm(n, 0, 1)
a = t.test(x, y, var.equal = TRUE)
d[i] = a[[1]]/N
p[i] = a[[3]]
}
# par(mfcol = c(2, npar))
hist(p) ; hist(d)
}, "n")
#inputs
data <- c(30,300)
par(mfcol = c(2, length(data)))
t.sim(n = data, es = c(.1), n.sim = 1e3)

How to make `integrate()` to accept a vector in an R function?

I am wondering how I could make my function Bpp to accept a vector for its first argument t?
Bpp = function(t, n1, n2 = NULL){
N = ifelse(is.null(n2), n1, n1*n2/(n1+n2))
df = ifelse(is.null(n2), n1 - 1, n1 + n2 - 2)
H1 = integrate(function(delta)dcauchy(delta, 0, sqrt(2)/2)*dt(t, df, delta*sqrt(N)), -Inf, Inf)[[1]]
H0 = dt(t, df)
BF10 = H1/H0
p.value = 2*(1-pt(abs(t), df))
list(BF10 = BF10, p.value = p.value)
}
Bpp(t = -6:6, 20, 20) ## This will give error because `t` is now a vector?
Looks like I could give a quick answer without testing. Use the following in your Bpp:
# joint density
joint <- function(delta, t) dcauchy(delta, 0, sqrt(2)/2) * dt(t, df, delta*sqrt(N))
# marginal density of `t`
marginal.t <- function (t) integrate(joint, lower = -Inf, upper = Inf, t = t)[[1]]
H1 <- sapply(t, marginal.t)
So, here we also could use Vectorize how would that look like?
Use your original Bpp:
Bpp <- Vectorize(Bpp, vectorize.args = "t")
Bpp(-6:6, 20, 20)

Automatically solve an equation of `pt` for `ncp`

I wonder if it is possible to efficiently change ncp in the below code such that x becomes .025 and .975 (within rounding error).
x <- pt(q = 5, df = 19, ncp = ?)
----------
Clarification
q = 5 and df = 19 (above) are just two hypothetical numbers, so q and df could be any other two numbers. What I expect is a function / routine, that takes q and df as input.
What is wrong with uniroot?
f <- function (ncp, alpha) pt(q = 5, df = 19, ncp = ncp) - alpha
par(mfrow = c(1,2))
curve(f(ncp, 0.025), from = 5, to = 10, xname = "ncp", main = "0.025")
abline(h = 0)
curve(f(ncp, 0.975), from = 0, to = 5, xname = "ncp", main = "0.975")
abline(h = 0)
So for 0.025 case, the root lies in (7, 8); for 0.975 case, the root lies in (2, 3).
uniroot(f, c(7, 8), alpha = 0.025)$root
#[1] 7.476482
uniroot(f, c(2, 3), alpha = 0.975)$root
#[1] 2.443316
---------
(After some discussion...)
OK, now I see your ultimate goal. You want to implement this equation solver as a function, with input q and df. So they are unknown, but fixed. They might come out of an experiment.
Ideally if there is an analytical solution, i.e., ncp can be written as a formula in terms of q, df and alpha, that would be so great. However, this is not possible for t-distribution.
Numerical solution is the way, but uniroot is not a great option for this purpose, as it relies on "plot - view - guess - specification". The answer by loki is also crude but with some improvement. It is a grid search, with fixed step size. Start from a value near 0, say 0.001, and increase this value and check for approximation error. We stop when this error fails to decrease.
This really initiates the idea of numerical optimization with Newton-method or quasi-Newton method. In 1D case, we can use function optimize. It does variable step size in searching, so it converges faster than a fixed step-size searching.
Let's define our function as:
ncp_solver <- function (alpha, q, df) {
## objective function: we minimize squared approximation error
obj_fun <- function (ncp, alpha = alpha, q = q, df = df) {
(pt(q = q, df = df, ncp = ncp) - alpha) ^ 2
}
## now we call `optimize`
oo <- optimize(obj_fun, interval = c(-37.62, 37.62), alpha = alpha, q = q, df = df)
## post processing
oo <- unlist(oo, use.names = FALSE) ## list to numerical vector
oo[2] <- sqrt(oo[2]) ## squared error to absolute error
## return
setNames(oo, c("ncp", "abs.error"))
}
Note, -37.62 / 37.62 is chosen as lower / upper bound for ncp, as it is the maximum supported by t-distribution in R (read ?dt).
For example, let's try this function. If you, as given in your question, has q = 5 and df = 19:
ncp_solver(alpha = 0.025, q = 5, df = 19)
# ncp abs.error
#7.476472e+00 1.251142e-07
The result is a named vector, with ncp and absolute approximation error.
Similarly we can do:
ncp_solver(alpha = 0.975, q = 5, df = 19)
# ncp abs.error
#2.443347e+00 7.221928e-07
----------
Follow up
Is it possible that in the function ncp_solver(), alpha takes a c(.025, .975) together?
Why not wrapping it up for a "vectorization":
sapply(c(0.025, 0.975), ncp_solver, q = 5, df = 19)
# [,1] [,2]
#ncp 7.476472e+00 2.443347e+00
#abs.error 1.251142e-07 7.221928e-07
How come 0.025 gives upper bound of confidence interval, while 0.975 gives lower bound of confidence interval? Should this relationship reversed?
No surprise. By default pt computes lower tail probability. If you want the "right" relationship, set lower.tail = FALSE in pt:
ncp_solver <- function (alpha, q, df) {
## objective function: we minimize squared approximation error
obj_fun <- function (ncp, alpha = alpha, q = q, df = df) {
(pt(q = q, df = df, ncp = ncp, lower.tail = FALSE) - alpha) ^ 2
}
## now we call `optimize`
oo <- optimize(obj_fun, interval = c(-37.62, 37.62), alpha = alpha, q = q, df = df)
## post processing
oo <- unlist(oo, use.names = FALSE) ## list to numerical vector
oo[2] <- sqrt(oo[2]) ## squared error to absolute error
## return
setNames(oo, c("ncp", "abs.error"))
}
Now you see:
ncp_solver(0.025, 5, 19)[[1]] ## use "[[" not "[" to drop name
#[1] 2.443316
ncp_solver(0.975, 5, 19)[[1]]
#[1] 7.476492
--------
Bug report and fix
I was reported that the above ncp_solver is unstable. For example:
ncp_solver(alpha = 0.025, q = 0, df = 98)
# ncp abs.error
#-8.880922 0.025000
But on the other hand, if we double check with uniroot here:
f <- function (ncp, alpha) pt(q = 0, df = 98, ncp = ncp, lower.tail = FALSE) - alpha
curve(f(ncp, 0.025), from = -3, to = 0, xname = "ncp"); abline(h = 0)
uniroot(f, c(-2, -1.5), 0.025)$root
#[1] -1.959961
So there is clearly something wrong with ncp_solver.
Well it turns out that we can not use too big bound, c(-37.62, 37.62). If we narrow it to c(-35, 35), it will be alright.
Also, to avoid tolerance problem, we can change objective function from squared error to absolute error:
ncp_solver <- function (alpha, q, df) {
## objective function: we minimize absolute approximation error
obj_fun <- function (ncp, alpha = alpha, q = q, df = df) {
abs(pt(q = q, df = df, ncp = ncp, lower.tail = FALSE) - alpha)
}
## now we call `optimize`
oo <- optimize(obj_fun, interval = c(-35, 35), alpha = alpha, q = q, df = df)
## post processing and return
oo <- unlist(oo, use.names = FALSE) ## list to numerical vector
setNames(oo, c("ncp", "abs.error"))
}
ncp_solver(alpha = 0.025, q = 0, df = 98)
# ncp abs.error
#-1.959980e+00 9.190327e-07
Damn, this is a pretty annoying bug. But relax now.
Report on getting warning messages from pt
I also receive some report on annoying warning messages from pt:
ncp_solver(0.025, -5, 19)
# ncp abs.error
#-7.476488e+00 5.760562e-07
#Warning message:
#In pt(q = q, df = df, ncp = ncp, lower.tail = FALSE) :
# full precision may not have been achieved in 'pnt{final}'
I am not too sure what is going on here, but meanwhile I did not observe misleading result. Therefore, I decide to suppress those warnings from pt, using suppressWarnings:
ncp_solver <- function (alpha, q, df) {
## objective function: we minimize absolute approximation error
obj_fun <- function (ncp, alpha = alpha, q = q, df = df) {
abs(suppressWarnings(pt(q = q, df = df, ncp = ncp, lower.tail = FALSE)) - alpha)
}
## now we call `optimize`
oo <- optimize(obj_fun, interval = c(-35, 35), alpha = alpha, q = q, df = df)
## post processing and return
oo <- unlist(oo, use.names = FALSE) ## list to numerical vector
setNames(oo, c("ncp", "abs.error"))
}
ncp_solver(0.025, -5, 19)
# ncp abs.error
#-7.476488e+00 5.760562e-07
OK, quiet now.
You could use two while loops like this:
i <- 0.001
lowerFound <- FALSE
while(!lowerFound){
x <- pt(q = 5, df = 19, ncp = i)
if (round(x, 3) == 0.025){
lowerFound <- TRUE
print(paste("Lower is", i))
lower <- i
} else {
i <- i + 0.0005
}
}
i <- 0.001
upperFound <- FALSE
while(!upperFound){
x <- pt(q = 5, df = 19, ncp = i)
if (round(x, 3) == 0.975){
upperFound <- TRUE
print(paste("Upper is ", i))
upper <- i
} else {
i <- i + 0.0005
}
}
c(Lower = lower, Upper = upper)
# Lower Upper
# 7.4655 2.4330
Of course, you can adapt the increment in i <- i + .... or change the check if (round(x,...) == ....) to fit this solution to your specific needs of accuracy.
I know this is an old question, but there is now a one-line solution to this problem using the conf.limits.nct() function in the MBESS package.
install.packages("MBESS")
library(MBESS)
result <- conf.limits.nct(t.value = 5, df = 19)
result
$Lower.Limit
[1] 2.443332
$Prob.Less.Lower
[1] 0.025
$Upper.Limit
[1] 7.476475
$Prob.Greater.Upper
[1] 0.025
$Lower.Limit is the result where pt = 0.975
$Upper.Limit is the result where pt = 0.025
pt(q=5,df=19,ncp=result$Lower.Limit)
[1] 0.975
> pt(q=5,df=19,ncp=result$Upper.Limit)
[1] 0.025

n-armed bandit simulation in R

I'm using Sutton & Barto's ebook Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction to study reinforcement learning. I'm having some issues trying to emulate the results (plots) on the action-value page.
More specifically, how can I simulate the greedy value for each task? The book says:
...we can plot the performance and behavior of various methods as
they improve with experience over 1000 plays...
So I guess I have to keep track of the exploratory values as better ones are found. The issue is how to do this using the greedy approach - since there are no exploratory moves, how do I know what is a greedy behavior?
Thanks for all the comments and answers!
UPDATE: See code on my answer.
I finally got this right. The eps player should beat the greedy player because of the exploratory moves, as pointed out int the book.
The code is slow and need some optimizations, but here it is:
get.testbed = function(arms = 10, plays = 500, u = 0, sdev.arm = 1, sdev.rewards = 1){
optimal = rnorm(arms, u, sdev.arm)
rewards = sapply(optimal, function(x)rnorm(plays, x, sdev.rewards))
list(optimal = optimal, rewards = rewards)
}
play.slots = function(arms = 10, plays = 500, u = 0, sdev.arm = 1, sdev.rewards = 1, eps = 0.1){
testbed = get.testbed(arms, plays, u, sdev.arm, sdev.rewards)
optimal = testbed$optimal
rewards = testbed$rewards
optim.index = which.max(optimal)
slot.rewards = rep(0, arms)
reward.hist = rep(0, plays)
optimal.hist = rep(0, plays)
pulls = rep(0, arms)
probs = runif(plays)
# vetorizar
for (i in 1:plays){
## dont use ifelse() in this case
## idx = ifelse(probs[i] < eps, sample(arms, 1), which.max(slot.rewards))
idx = if (probs[i] < eps) sample(arms, 1) else which.max(slot.rewards)
reward.hist[i] = rewards[i, idx]
if (idx == optim.index)
optimal.hist[i] = 1
slot.rewards[idx] = slot.rewards[idx] + (rewards[i, idx] - slot.rewards[idx])/(pulls[idx] + 1)
pulls[idx] = pulls[idx] + 1
}
list(slot.rewards = slot.rewards, reward.hist = reward.hist, optimal.hist = optimal.hist, pulls = pulls)
}
do.simulation = function(N = 100, arms = 10, plays = 500, u = 0, sdev.arm = 1, sdev.rewards = 1, eps = c(0.0, 0.01, 0.1)){
n.players = length(eps)
col.names = paste('eps', eps)
rewards.hist = matrix(0, nrow = plays, ncol = n.players)
optim.hist = matrix(0, nrow = plays, ncol = n.players)
colnames(rewards.hist) = col.names
colnames(optim.hist) = col.names
for (p in 1:n.players){
for (i in 1:N){
play.results = play.slots(arms, plays, u, sdev.arm, sdev.rewards, eps[p])
rewards.hist[, p] = rewards.hist[, p] + play.results$reward.hist
optim.hist[, p] = optim.hist[, p] + play.results$optimal.hist
}
}
rewards.hist = rewards.hist/N
optim.hist = optim.hist/N
optim.hist = apply(optim.hist, 2, function(x)cumsum(x)/(1:plays))
### Plot helper ###
plot.result = function(x, n.series, colors, leg.names, ...){
for (i in 1:n.series){
if (i == 1)
plot.ts(x[, i], ylim = 2*range(x), col = colors[i], ...)
else
lines(x[, i], col = colors[i], ...)
grid(col = 'lightgray')
}
legend('topleft', leg.names, col = colors, lwd = 2, cex = 0.6, box.lwd = NA)
}
### Plot helper ###
#### Plots ####
require(RColorBrewer)
colors = brewer.pal(n.players + 3, 'Set2')
op <-par(mfrow = c(2, 1), no.readonly = TRUE)
plot.result(rewards.hist, n.players, colors, col.names, xlab = 'Plays', ylab = 'Average reward', lwd = 2)
plot.result(optim.hist, n.players, colors, col.names, xlab = 'Plays', ylab = 'Optimal move %', lwd = 2)
#### Plots ####
par(op)
}
To run it just call
do.simulation(N = 100, arms = 10, eps = c(0, 0.01, 0.1))
You could also choose to make use of the R package "contextual", which aims to ease the implementation and evaluation of both context-free (as described in Sutton & Barto) and contextual (such as for example LinUCB) Multi-Armed Bandit policies.
The package actually offers a vignette on how to replicate all Sutton & Barto bandit plots. For example, to generate the ε-greedy plots, just simulate EpsilonGreedy policies against a Gaussian bandit :
library(contextual)
set.seed(2)
mus <- rnorm(10, 0, 1)
sigmas <- rep(1, 10)
bandit <- BasicGaussianBandit$new(mu_per_arm = mus, sigma_per_arm = sigmas)
agents <- list(Agent$new(EpsilonGreedyPolicy$new(0), bandit, "e = 0, greedy"),
Agent$new(EpsilonGreedyPolicy$new(0.1), bandit, "e = 0.1"),
Agent$new(EpsilonGreedyPolicy$new(0.01), bandit, "e = 0.01"))
simulator <- Simulator$new(agents = agents, horizon = 1000, simulations = 2000)
history <- simulator$run()
plot(history, type = "average", regret = FALSE, lwd = 1, legend_position = "bottomright")
plot(history, type = "optimal", lwd = 1, legend_position = "bottomright")
Full disclosure: I am one of the developers of the package.
this is what I have so far based on our chat:
set.seed(1)
getRewardsGaussian <- function(arms, plays) {
## assuming each action has a normal distribution
# first generate new means
QStar <- rnorm(arms, 0, 1)
# then for each mean, generate `play`-many samples
sapply(QStar, function(u)
rnorm(plays, u, 1))
}
CalculateRewardsPerMethod <- function(arms=7, epsi1=0.01, epsi2=0.1
, plays=1000, methods=c("greedy", "epsi1", "epsi2")) {
# names for easy handling
names(methods) <- methods
arm.names <- paste0("Arm", ifelse((1:arms)<10, 0, ""), 1:arms)
# this could be different if not all actions' rewards have a gaussian dist.
rewards.source <- getRewardsGaussian(arms, plays)
# Three dimensional array to track running averages of each method
running.avgs <-
array(0, dim=c(plays, arms, length(methods))
, dimnames=list(PlayNo.=NULL, Arm=arm.names, Method=methods))
# Three dimensional array to track the outcome of each play, according to each method
rewards.received <-
array(NA_real_, dim=c(plays, 2, length(methods))
, dimnames=list(PlayNo.=seq(plays), Outcome=c("Arm", "Reward"), Method=methods))
# define the function internally to not have to pass running.avgs
chooseAnArm <- function(p) {
# Note that in a tie, which.max returns the lowest value, which is what we want
maxes <- apply(running.avgs[p, ,methods, drop=FALSE], 3, which.max)
# Note: deliberately drawing two separate random numbers and keeping this as
# two lines of code to accent that the two draws should not be related
if(runif(1) < epsi1)
maxes["epsi1"] <- sample(arms, 1)
if(runif(1) < epsi2)
maxes["epsi2"] <- sample(arms, 1)
return(maxes)
}
## TODO: Perform each action at least once, then select according to algorithm
## Starting points. Everyone starts at machine 3
choice <- c(3, 3, 3)
reward <- rewards.source[1, choice]
## First run, slightly different
rewards.received[1,,] <- rbind(choice, reward)
running.avgs[1, choice, ] <- reward # if different starting points, this needs to change like below
## HERE IS WHERE WE START PULLING THE LEVERS ##
## ----------------------------------------- ##
for (p in 2:plays) {
choice <- chooseAnArm(p)
reward <- rewards.source[p, choice]
# Note: When dropping a dim, the methods will be the columns
# and the Outcome info will be the rows. Use `rbind` instead of `cbind`.
rewards.received[p,,names(choice)] <- rbind(choice, reward)
## Update the running averages.
## For each method, the current running averages are the same as the
## previous for all arms, except for the one chosen this round.
## Thus start with last round's averages, then update the one arm.
running.avgs[p,,] <- running.avgs[p-1,,]
# The updating is only involved part (due to lots of array-indexing)
running.avgs[p,,][cbind(choice, 1:3)] <-
sapply(names(choice), function(m)
# Update the running average for the selected arm (for the current play & method)
mean( rewards.received[ 1:p,,,drop=FALSE][ rewards.received[1:p,"Arm",m] == choice[m],"Reward",m])
)
} # end for-loop
## DIFFERENT RETURN OPTIONS ##
## ------------------------ ##
## All rewards received, in simplifed matrix (dropping information on arm chosen)
# return(rewards.received[, "Reward", ])
## All rewards received, along with which arm chosen:
# return(rewards.received)
## Running averages of the rewards received by method
return( apply(rewards.received[, "Reward", ], 2, cumsum) / (1:plays) )
}
### EXECUTION (AND SIMULATION)
## PARAMETERS
arms <- 10
plays <- 1000
epsi1 <- 0.01
epsi2 <- 0.1
simuls <- 50 # 2000
methods=c("greedy", "epsi1", "epsi2")
## Single Iteration:
### we can run system time to get an idea for how long one will take
tme <- system.time( CalculateRewardsPerMethod(arms=arms, epsi1=epsi1, epsi2=epsi2, plays=plays) )
cat("Expected run time is approx: ", round((simuls * tme[["elapsed"]]) / 60, 1), " minutes")
## Multiple iterations (simulations)
rewards.received.list <- replicate(simuls, CalculateRewardsPerMethod(arms=arms, epsi1=epsi1, epsi2=epsi2, plays=plays), simplify="array")
## Compute average across simulations
rewards.received <- apply(rewards.received.list, 1:2, mean)
## RESULTS
head(rewards.received, 17)
MeanRewards <- rewards.received
## If using an alternate return method in `Calculate..` use the two lines below to calculate running avg
# CumulRewards <- apply(rewards.received, 2, cumsum)
# MeanRewards <- CumulRewards / (1:plays)
## PLOT
plot.ts(MeanRewards[, "greedy"], col = 'red', lwd = 2, ylim = range(MeanRewards), ylab = 'Average reward', xlab="Plays")
lines(MeanRewards[, "epsi1"], col = 'orange', lwd = 2)
lines(MeanRewards[, "epsi2"], col = 'navy', lwd = 2)
grid(col = 'darkgray')
legend('bottomright', c('greedy', paste("epsi1 =", epsi1), paste("epsi2 =", epsi2)), col = c('red', 'orange', 'navy'), lwd = 2, cex = 0.8)
You may also want to check this link
https://www.datahubbs.com/multi_armed_bandits_reinforcement_learning_1/
Copy of the relevant code from the above source
It does not use R but simply np.random.rand() from numpy
class eps_bandit:
'''
epsilon-greedy k-bandit problem
Inputs
=====================================================
k: number of arms (int)
eps: probability of random action 0 < eps < 1 (float)
iters: number of steps (int)
mu: set the average rewards for each of the k-arms.
Set to "random" for the rewards to be selected from
a normal distribution with mean = 0.
Set to "sequence" for the means to be ordered from
0 to k-1.
Pass a list or array of length = k for user-defined
values.
'''
def __init__(self, k, eps, iters, mu='random'):
# Number of arms
self.k = k
# Search probability
self.eps = eps
# Number of iterations
self.iters = iters
# Step count
self.n = 0
# Step count for each arm
self.k_n = np.zeros(k)
# Total mean reward
self.mean_reward = 0
self.reward = np.zeros(iters)
# Mean reward for each arm
self.k_reward = np.zeros(k)
if type(mu) == list or type(mu).__module__ == np.__name__:
# User-defined averages
self.mu = np.array(mu)
elif mu == 'random':
# Draw means from probability distribution
self.mu = np.random.normal(0, 1, k)
elif mu == 'sequence':
# Increase the mean for each arm by one
self.mu = np.linspace(0, k-1, k)
def pull(self):
# Generate random number
p = np.random.rand()
if self.eps == 0 and self.n == 0:
a = np.random.choice(self.k)
elif p < self.eps:
# Randomly select an action
a = np.random.choice(self.k)
else:
# Take greedy action
a = np.argmax(self.k_reward)
reward = np.random.normal(self.mu[a], 1)
# Update counts
self.n += 1
self.k_n[a] += 1
# Update total
self.mean_reward = self.mean_reward + (
reward - self.mean_reward) / self.n
# Update results for a_k
self.k_reward[a] = self.k_reward[a] + (
reward - self.k_reward[a]) / self.k_n[a]
def run(self):
for i in range(self.iters):
self.pull()
self.reward[i] = self.mean_reward
def reset(self):
# Resets results while keeping settings
self.n = 0
self.k_n = np.zeros(k)
self.mean_reward = 0
self.reward = np.zeros(iters)
self.k_reward = np.zeros(k)

Resources