I have a very specific datasets with 50 people. Each person has a response (sex) and ~2000 measurements of some biological stuff.
We have three independent replicates from each person, so 3 rows pr. person.
I can easily use caret and groupKFold() to keep each person in either training or test sets - that works fine.
Then I simply predict each replicate separately (so 3 prediction pr person).
I want to use these three prediction together and make a combined prediction pr. person either using majority vote and/or some other scheme.
I.e. - so for each person I get the 3 predictions and predict the response to be the one with most votes. That's pretty easy to do for the final model, but it should also be used in the tuning step (i.e. in the cross validation picking parameter values).
I think I can do that in the summaryFunction=... when calling caret::trainControl() but I would simply like to ask:
Is there a simpler way of doing this?
I have googled around - but I keep failing in finding people with similar problems. And I really hope someone can point me in the right direction.
Related
Is it possible to use both cluster standard errors and multilevel models together and how does one implement this in R?
In my set up I am running a conjoint experiment in 26 countries with 2000 participants per country. Like any conjoint experiment each participant is shown two vignettes and asked to choose/rate each vignette. The same participants is then shown two fresh vignettes for comparison and asked to repeat the task. In this case each participant performs two comparisons. The hierarchy is thus comparisons nested within individuals nested within countries. I am currently running a multilevel model with each comparison at level 1 and country is the level 2 unit. Obviously comparisons within individuals are likely to be correlated so I'd like to cluster standard errors at the individual level as well. It seems overkill to add another level in the MLM for this since the size of my clusters are extremely small (n=2) and it makes more sense to do my analysis at the individual level (not to mention unnecessarily complicating the model since with 2000 individuals*26 countries the parameter space becomes crazy huge). Is this possible? If so how does one do this in R together with a multilevel model set up?
The cluster size of 2 is not an issue, and I don't see any issue with the parameter space either. If you fit random intercepts for participants, and countries, these are estimated as latent normally distributed variables. A model such as:
lmer(outomce ~ fixed effects + (1|country/participant)
This will handle the dependencies within clusters (at the participant level and the country level) so there will be no need to use cluster standard errors.
I am approaching a problem that Keras must offer an excellent solution for, but I am having problems developing an approach (because I am such a neophyte concerning anything for deep learning). I have sales data. It contains 11106 distinct customers, each with its time series of purchases, of varying length (anyway from 1 to 15 periods).
I want to develop a single model to predict each customer's purchase amount for the next period. I like the idea of an LSTM, but clearly, I cannot make one for each customer; even if I tried, there would not be enough data for an LSTM in any case---the longest individual time series only has 15 periods.
I have used types of Markov chains, clustering, and regression in the past to model this kind of data. I am asking the question here, though, about what type of model in Keras is suited to this type of prediction. A complication is that all customers can be clustered by their overall patterns. Some belong together based on similarity; others do not; e.g., some customers spend with patterns like $100-$100-$100, others like $100-$100-$1000-$10000, and so on.
Can anyone point me to a type of sequential model supported by Keras that might handle this well? Thank you.
I am trying to achieve this in R. Haven't been able to build a model that gives me more than about .3 accuracy.
I don't think the main difficulty is coming from which model to use as much as how to frame the problem.
As you mention, "WHO" is spending the money seems as relevant as their past transaction in knowing how much they will likely spend.
But you cannot train 10k+ models either for each customers.
Instead I would suggest clustering your customers base, and instead trying to fit a model by cluster, using all the time series combined for the customers in that cluster to train the same model.
This would allow each model to learn the spending pattern of that particular group.
For that you can use LTSM or RNN model.
Hi here's my suggestion and I will edit it later to provide you with more information
Since its a sequence problem you should use RNN based models: LSTM, GRU's
I am trying to think of a potential way to predict an ID value given text data. The data is broken by:
Group: A 4 digit number in which a group of IDs exists in
ID: 13 Digit Number that is the Group Number + a Unique Value
Text: Words coming from documents.
Goal: is to predict an ID number given only the text from a document.
The data that I have has about 1200 different IDs while there are only 140 different groups. The document term matrix is about 186 columns wide with about 20,000 rows. I have a lot more data I could include. I had created a simple neural net to predict the Group number with 70% accuracy. My idea is to use this model first to predict the group number and then build separate models for each group to narrow the amount of IDs in the prediction. A final model would be trained and would be used to predict the ID. Below is a drawing of what I had in mind. Is this similar to stacking in ensemble learning? I am relatively new to machine learning and I am trying to think of different ways to approach this problem.
Am I on the right path or is there a better way of doing this? Any advice is greatly appreciated.
A lot depends on how well you think you can infer the group_number and unique_value from the text. Does the unique_value depend at all on the group_number? If so, then you will likely want to predict the group_number first and use that in the prediction of the unique_value - as you have suggested doing for each unique group number. You will also have to consider the amount of data you have for each given group and if it's enough to train respective models. Give it a shot, and if it doesn't work, try a single neural network where you enter the text and the group number you've already predicted!
Good Luck!
I have a question about LASSO. I'm getting crazy because it is something that I can not solve only according to my background. I'm a biologist.
Briefly I run LASSO using the R library "penalized". In particular I used the opt1D function with around 500 simulations on a data.frame (numerical) of around 30 columns that are my biomarkers (gene expression). I want to test and 3000 rows that are people of which around 50 are tumours and all the others are normals.
Unfortunately by using L1 regularization, all and really all coefficients of 500 simulations are 0. If I check L2 matrix of coefficients they are close to 0. Now my point is that I cannot think that all my biomarkers are not able to distinguish between Normals and Tumors.
I don't know if what I have done is all I can to check for the discriminatory potential of my molecules. Is there something else I can do to understand why are they all 0 and also is there something else I can do to verify that really they are not able to stratify my cohort?
Did you consider fitting your data without penalization before using regularization? L1 regularization will naturally result in a significant number of zero coefficients.
As a side note I would first run PCA/PCoA and see whether or not your genes separate according to your class variable. This could save you some time and allow you to trim your data set to those genes that show the greatest differences across your class variable. Also if you have relatively little experience with R I would suggest using a linear modeling package such as Limma since it has excellent documentation and many examples that are easy to follow.
I am just starting out with segmenting a customer database using R I have for an ecommerce retail business. I seek some guidance about the best approach to proceed with for this exercise.
I have searched the topics already posted here and tried them out myself like dist() and hclust(). However I am running into one issue or another and not able to overcome it since I am new to using R.
Here is the brief description of my problem.
I have approximately 480K records of customers who have bought so far. The data contains following columns:
email id
gender
city
total transactions so far
average basket value
average basket size ( no of item purchased during one transaction)
average discount claimed per transaction
No of days since the user first purchased
Average duration between two purchases
No of days since last transaction
The business goal of this exercise is to identify the most profitable segments and encourage repeat purchases in those segments using campaigns. Can I please get some guidance as to how to do this successfully without running into problems like the size of the sample or the data type of columns?
Read this to learn how to subset data frames. When you try to define d, it looks like you're providing way to much data, which might be fixed by subsetting your table first. If not, you might want to take a random sample of your data instead of all of it. Suppose you know that columns 4 through 10 of your data frame called cust_data contain numerical data, then you might try this:
cust_data2 <- cust_data[, 4:10]
d <- dist(cust_data2)
For large values, you may want to log transform them--just experiment and see what makes sense. I really am not sure about this, and that's just a suggestion. Maybe choosing a more appropriate clustering or distance metric would be better.
Finally, when you run hclust, you need to pass in the d matrix, and not the original data set.
h <- hclust(d, "ave")
Sadly your data does not contain any attributes that indicate what types of items/transactions did NOT result in a sale.
I am not sure if clustering is the way to go here.
Here are some ideas:
First split your data into a training set (say 70%) and a test set.
Set up a simple linear regression model with,say, "average basket value" as a response variable, and all other variables as independent variables.
fit <-lm(averagebasketvalue ~., data = custdata)
Run the model on the training set, determine significant attributes (those with at least one star in the summary(fit) output), then focus on those variables.
Check your regression coefficients on the test set, by calculating R-squared and Sum of squared errors (SSE) on the test set. You can use the predict() function , the calls will look like
fitpred <- predict(fit, newdata=testset)
summary(fitpred) # will give you R²
Maybe "city" contains too many unique values to be meaningful. Try to generalize them by introducing a new attribute CityClass (e.g. BigCity-MediumCity-SmallCity ... or whatever classification scheme is useful for your cities). You might also condition the model on "gender". Drop "email id".
This can go on for a while... play with the model to try to get better R-squared and SSEs.
I think a tree-based model (rpart) might also work well here.
Then you might change to cluster analysis at a later time.