To better estimate the accuracy of the classifier, I would like to carry out classification procedure which will be repeated 100 times with randomly changing sets of training and test samples (divided 50% by class). I don't know how to split this sets randomly and repeat it 100 times.
You can create multiple splits based on the outcome variable at once with the times argument to caret::createDataPartition().
For example, the following line of code will produce a list of 100 numeric vectors of data indices. (Note: I set list = TRUE so we can use purrr::map() next)
indices <- caret::createDataPartition(extracted$class, p = 0.5, list = TRUE, times = 100)
Now you can use purrr::map() to iterate over each and get a list of training and testing sets.
resample_data <- tibble(
training_sets = map(indices, ~ extracted[.x, ]),
testing_sets = map(indices, ~ extracted[-.x, ])
)
Related
I have two separate data sets: one for train (1000000 observation) and the other one for test (1000000 observation). I divided the train set into 3 sets (mytrain: 700000 observations, myvalid: 150000 observations, mytest:150000 observations). Thetest set with 1000000 observations doesn't include the target variable, so it should be used for the final test. Since there are some missing values for categorical variables, I need to use mice to impute them. I should reuse the imputation done on mytrain set to fill the missing values in the myvalid, mytest and test sets. Based on the answer to this question, I should do this:
data2 <- rbind(mytrain,myval,mytest,test)
data2$ST_EMPL <- as.factor(data2$ST_EMPL)
data2$TYP_RES <- as.factor(data2$TYP_RES)
imp <- mice(data2, method = "cart", m = 1, maxit = 1, seed = 123,
ignore = c(rep(FALSE, 700000),rep(TRUE, 1300000)))
data2.imp <- complete(imp,1)
summary(imp)
mytrainN <- data2.imp[1:700000,]
myvalN <- data2.imp[700001:850000,]
mytestN <- data2.imp[850001:1000000,]
testN <- data2.imp[1000001:2000000,]
However, since the test set does not have the target column, it is not possible to merge it with mytrain, mytest, and myvalid. Is it possible to add a hypothetical target column (with the value of say 10 for all 1000000 observations) to the test set?
I am performing a PLS-DA analysis in R using the mixOmics package. I have one binary Y variable (presence or absence of wetland) and 21 continuous predictor variables (X) with values ranging from 1 to 100.
I have made the model with the data_training dataset and want to predict new outcomes with the data_validation dataset. These datasets have exactly the same structure.
My code looks like:
library(mixOmics)
model.plsda<-plsda(X,Y, ncomp = 10)
myPredictions <- predict(model.plsda, newdata = data_validation[,-1], dist = "max.dist")
I want to predict the outcome based on 10, 9, 8, ... to 2 principal components. By using the get.confusion_matrix function, I want to estimate the error rate for every number of principal components.
prediction <- myPredictions$class$max.dist[,10] #prediction based on 10 components
confusion.mat = get.confusion_matrix(truth = data_validatie[,1], predicted = prediction)
get.BER(confusion.mat)
I can do this seperately for 10 times, but I want do that a little faster. Therefore I was thinking of making a list with the results of prediction for every number of components...
library(BBmisc)
prediction_test <- myPredictions$class$max.dist
predictions_components <- convertColsToList(prediction_test, name.list = T, name.vector = T, factors.as.char = T)
...and then using lapply with the get.confusion_matrix and get.BER function. But then I don't know how to do that. I have searched on the internet, but I can't find a solution that works. How can I do this?
Many thanks for your help!
Without reproducible there is no way to test this but you need to convert the code you want to run each time into a function. Something like this:
confmat <- function(x) {
prediction <- myPredictions$class$max.dist[,x] #prediction based on 10 components
confusion.mat = get.confusion_matrix(truth = data_validatie[,1], predicted = prediction)
get.BER(confusion.mat)
}
Now lapply:
results <- lapply(10:2, confmat)
That will return a list with the get.BER results for each number of PCs so results[[1]] will be the results for 10 PCs. You will not get values for prediction or confusionmat unless they are included in the results returned by get.BER. If you want all of that, you need to replace the last line to the function with return(list(prediction, confusionmat, get.BER(confusion.mat)). This will produce a list of the lists so that results[[1]][[1]] will be the results of prediction for 10 PCs and results[[1]][[2]] and results[[1]][[3]] will be confusionmat and get.BER(confusion.mat) respectively.
I am a beginner to R and am having trouble with something that feels basic but I am not sure how to do it. I have a data set with 1319 rows and I want to setup training data for observations 1 to 1000 and the test data for 1001 to 1319.
Comparing with notes from my class and the professor set this up by doing a Boolean vector by the 'Year' variable in her data. For example:
train=(Year<2005)
And that returns the True/False statements.
I understand that and would be able to setup a Boolean vector if I was subsetting my data by a variable but instead I have to strictly by the number of rows which I do not understand how to accomplish. I tried
train=(data$nrow < 1001)
But got logical(0) as a result.
Can anyone lead me in the right direction?
You get logical(0) because nrow is not a column
You can also subset your dataframe by using row numbers
train = 1:1000 # vector with integers from 1 to 1000
test = 1001:nrow(data)
train_data = data[train,]
test_data = data[test,]
But be careful, unless the order of rows in your dataframe is completely random, you probably want to get 1000 rows randomly and not the 1000 first ones, you can do this using
train = sample(1:nrow(data),1000)
You can then get your train_data and test_data using
train_data = data[train,]
test_data = data[setdiff(1:nrow(data),train),]
The setdiff function is used to get all rows not selected in train
The issue with splitting your data set by rows is the potential to introduce bias into your training and testing set - particularly for ordered data.
# Create a data set
data <- data.frame(year = sample(seq(2000, 2019, by = 1), 1000, replace = T),
data = sample(seq(0, 1, by = 0.01), 1000, replace = T))
nrow(data)
[1] 1000
If you really want to take the first n rows then you can try:
first.n.rows <- data[1:1000, ]
The caret package provides a more reliable approach to using cross validation in your models.
First create the partition rule:
library(caret)
inTrain <- createDataPartition(y = data$year,
p = 0.8, list = FALSE)
Note y = data$year this tells R to use the variable year to sample from, ensuring you don't get ordered data and introduced bias to the model.
The p argument tells caret how much of the original data should be partitioned to the training set, in this case 80%.
Then apply the partition to the data set:
# Create the training set
train <- data[inTrain,]
# Create the testing set
test <- data[-inTrain,]
nrow(train) + nrow(test)
[1] 1000
For a paper I'm writing I have subsetted a larger dataset into 3 groups, because I thought the strength of correlations between 2 variables in those groups would differ (they did). I want to see if subsetting my data into random groupings would also significantly affect the strength of correlations (i.e., whether what I'm seeing is just an effect of subsetting, or if those groupings are actually significant).
To this end, I am trying to generate n new data frames by randomly sampling 150 rows from an existing dataset, and then want to calculate correlation coefficients for two variables in those n new data frames, saving the correlation coefficient and significance in a new file.
But, HOW?
I can do it manually, e.g., with dplyr, something like
newdata <- sample_n(Random_sample_data, 150)
output <- cor.test(newdata$x, newdata$y, method="kendall")
I'd obviously like to not type this out 1000 or 100000 times, and have been trying things with loops and lapply (see below) but they've not worked (undoubtedly due to something really obvious that I'm missing!).
Here I have tried to assign each row to a different group, with 10 groups in total, and then to do correlations between x and y by those groups:
Random_sample_data<-select(Range_corrected, x, y)
cat <- sample(1:10, 1229, replace=TRUE)
Random_sample_cats<-cbind(Random_sample_data,cat)
correlation <- function(c) {
c <- cor.test(x,y, method="kendall")
return(c)
}
b<- daply(Random_sample_cats, .(cat), correlation)
Error message:
Error in cor.test(x, y, method = "kendall") :
object 'x' not found
Once you have the code for what you want to do once, you can put it in replicate to do it n times. Here's a reproducible example on built-in data
result = replicate(n = 10, expr = {
newdata <- sample_n(mtcars, 10)
output <- cor.test(newdata$wt, newdata$qsec, method="kendall")
})
replicate will save the result of the last line of what you did (output <- ...) for each replication. It will attempt to simplify the result, in this case cor.test returns a list of length 8, so replicate will simplify the results to a matrix with 8 rows and 10 columns (1 column per replication).
You may want to clean up the results a little bit so that, e.g., you only save the p-value. Here, we store only the p-value, so the result is a vector with one p-value per replication, not a matrix:
result = replicate(n = 10, expr = {
newdata <- sample_n(mtcars, 10)
cor.test(newdata$wt, newdata$qsec, method="kendall")$p.value
})
I want to measure the features importance with the cforest function from the party library.
My output variable has something like 2000 samples in class 0 and 100 samples in class 1.
I think a good way to avoid bias due to class unbalance is to train each tree of the forest using a subsample such that the number of elements of class 1 is the same of the number of element in class 0.
Is there anyway to do that? I am thinking to an option like n_samples = c(20, 20)
EDIT:
An example of code
> iris.cf <- cforest(Species ~ ., data = iris,
+ control = cforest_unbiased(mtry = 2)) #<--- Here I would like to train the forest using a balanced subsample of the data
> varimp(object = iris.cf)
Sepal.Length Sepal.Width Petal.Length Petal.Width
0.048981818 0.002254545 0.305818182 0.271163636
>
EDIT:
Maybe my question is not clear enough.
Random forest is a set of decision trees. In general the decision trees are constructed using only a random subsample of the data. I would like that the used subsample has the same numbers of element in the class 1 and in the class 0.
EDIT:
The function that I am looking for is for sure available in the randomForest package
sampsize
Size(s) of sample to draw. For classification, if sampsize is a vector of the length the number of strata, then sampling is stratified by strata, and the elements of sampsize indicate the numbers to be drawn from the strata.
I need the same for the party package. Is there any way to get it?
I will assume you know what you want to accomplish, but don't know enough R to do that.
Not sure if the function provides balancing of data as an argument, but you can do it manually. Below is the code I quickly threw together. More elegant solution might exist.
# just in case
myData <- iris
# replicate everything *10* times. Replicate is just a "loop 10 times".
replicate(10,
{
# split dataset by class and add separate classes to list
splitList <- split(myData, myData$Species)
# sample *20* random rows from each matrix in a list
sampledList <- lapply(splitList, function(dat) { dat[sample(20),] })
# combine sampled rows to a data.frame
sampledData <- do.call(rbind, sampledList)
# your code below
res.cf <- cforest(Species ~ ., data = sampledData,
control = cforest_unbiased(mtry = 2)
)
varimp(object = res.cf)
}
)
Hope you can take it from here.