I am trying to solve the digit Recognizer competition in Kaggle and I run in to this error.
I loaded the training data and adjusted the values of it by dividing it with the maximum pixel value which is 255. After that, I am trying to build my model.
Here Goes my code,
Given_Training_data <- get(load("Given_Training_data.RData"))
Given_Testing_data <- get(load("Given_Testing_data.RData"))
Maximum_Pixel_value = max(Given_Training_data)
Tot_Col_Train_data = ncol(Given_Training_data)
training_data_adjusted <- Given_Training_data[, 2:ncol(Given_Training_data)]/Maximum_Pixel_value
testing_data_adjusted <- Given_Testing_data[, 2:ncol(Given_Testing_data)]/Maximum_Pixel_value
label_training_data <- Given_Training_data$label
final_training_data <- cbind(label_training_data, training_data_adjusted)
smp_size <- floor(0.75 * nrow(final_training_data))
set.seed(100)
training_ind <- sample(seq_len(nrow(final_training_data)), size = smp_size)
training_data1 <- final_training_data[training_ind, ]
train_no_label1 <- as.data.frame(training_data1[,-1])
train_label1 <-as.data.frame(training_data1[,1])
svm_model1 <- svm(train_label1,train_no_label1) #This line is throwing an error
Error : Error in predict.svm(ret, xhold, decision.values = TRUE) : Model is empty!
Please Kindly share your thoughts. I am not looking for an answer but rather some idea that guides me in the right direction as I am in a learning phase.
Thanks.
Update to the question :
trainlabel1 <- train_label1[sapply(train_label1, function(x) !is.factor(x) | length(unique(x))>1 )]
trainnolabel1 <- train_no_label1[sapply(train_no_label1, function(x) !is.factor(x) | length(unique(x))>1 )]
svm_model2 <- svm(trainlabel1,trainnolabel1,scale = F)
It didn't help either.
Read the manual (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/e1071/e1071.pdf):
svm(x, y = NULL, scale = TRUE, type = NULL, ...)
...
Arguments:
...
x a data matrix, a vector, or a sparse matrix (object of class
Matrix provided by the Matrix package, or of class matrix.csr
provided by the SparseM package,
or of class simple_triplet_matrix provided by the slam package).
y a response vector with one label for each row/component of x.
Can be either a factor (for classification tasks) or a numeric vector
(for regression).
Therefore, the mains problems are that your call to svm is switching the data matrix and the response vector, and that you are passing the response vector as integer, resulting in a regression model. Furthermore, you are also passing the response vector as a single-column data-frame, which is not exactly how you are supposed to do it. Hence, if you change the call to:
svm_model1 <- svm(train_no_label1, as.factor(train_label1[, 1]))
it will work as expected. Note that training will take some minutes to run.
You may also want to remove features that are constant (where the values in the respective column of the training data matrix are all identical) in the training data, since these will not influence the classification.
I don't think you need to scale it manually since svm itself will do it unlike most neural network package.
You can also use the formula version of svm instead of the matrix and vectors which is
svm(result~.,data = your_training_set)
in your case, I guess you want to make sure the result to be used as factor，because you want a label like 1,2,3 not 1.5467 which is a regression
I can debug it if you can share the data:Given_Training_data.RData
Related
I'm trying to get a summary plot using fastshap explain function as in the code below.
p_function_G<- function(object, newdata)
caret::predict.train(object,
newdata =
newdata,
type = "prob")[,"AntiSocial"] # select G class
# Calculate the Shapley values
#
# boostFit: is a caret model using catboost algorithm
# trainset: is the dataset used for bulding the caret model.
# The dataset contains 4 categories W,G,R,GM
# corresponding to 4 diferent animal behaviors
library(caret)
shap_values_G <- fastshap::explain(xgb_fit,
X = game_train,
pred_wrapper =
p_function_G,
nsim = 50,
newdata= game_train[which(game_test=="AntiSocial"),])
)
However I'm getting error
Error in 'stop_vctrs()':
can't combine latitude and gender <factor<919a3>>
What's the way out?
I see that you are adapting code from Julia Silge's Predict ratings for board games Tutorial. The original code used SHAPforxgboost for generating SHAP values, but you're using the fastshap package.
Because Shapley explanations are only recently starting to gain traction, there aren't very many standard data formats. fastshap does not like tidyverse tibbles, it only takes matrices or matrix-likes.
The error occurs because, by default, fastshap attempts to convert the tibble to a matrix. But this fails, because matrices can only have one type (f.x. either double or factor, not both).
I also ran into a similar issue and found that you can solve this by passing the X parameter as a data.frame. I don't have access to your full code but you could you try replacing the shap_values_G code-block as so:
shap_values_G <- fastshap::explain(xgb_fit,
X = game_train,
pred_wrapper =
p_function_G,
nsim = 50,
newdata= as.data.frame(game_train[which(game_test=="AntiSocial"),]))
)
Wrap newdata with as.data.frame. This converts the tibble to a dataframe and so shouldn't upset fastshap.
I am trying to input matrix data into the brm() function to run a signal regression. brm is from the brms package, which provides an interface to fit Bayesian models using Stan. Signal regression is when you model one covariate using another within the bigger model, and you use the by parameter like this: model <- brm(response ~ s(matrix1, by = matrix2) + ..., data = Data). The problem is, I cannot input my matrices using the 'data' parameter because it only allows one data.frame object to be inputted.
Here are my code and the errors I obtained from trying to get around that constraint...
First off, my reproducible code leading up to the model-building:
library(brms)
#100 rows, 4 columns. Each cell contains a number between 1 and 10
Data <- data.frame(runif(100,1,10),runif(100,1,10),runif(100,1,10),runif(100,1,10))
#Assign names to the columns
names(Data) <- c("d0_10","d0_100","d0_1000","d0_10000")
Data$Density <- as.matrix(Data)%*%c(-1,10,5,1)
#the coefficients we are modelling
d <- c(-1,10,5,1)
#Made a matrix with 4 columns with values 10, 100, 1000, 10000 which are evaluation points. Rows are repeats of the same column numbers
Bins <- 10^matrix(rep(1:4,times = dim(Data)[1]),ncol = 4,byrow =T)
Bins
As mentioned above, since 'data' only allows one data.frame object to be inputted, I've tried other ways of inputting my matrix data. These methods include:
1) making the matrix within the brm() function using as.matrix()
signalregression.brms <- brm(Density ~ s(Bins,by=as.matrix(Data[,c(c("d0_10","d0_100","d0_1000","d0_10000"))])),data = Data)
#Error in is(sexpr, "try-error") :
argument "sexpr" is missing, with no default
2) making the matrix outside the formula, storing it in a variable, then calling that variable inside the brm() function
Donuts <- as.matrix(Data[,c(c("d0_10","d0_100","d0_1000","d0_10000"))])
signalregression.brms <- brm(Density ~ s(Bins,by=Donuts),data = Data)
#Error: The following variables can neither be found in 'data' nor in 'data2':
'Bins', 'Donuts'
3) inputting a list containing the matrix using the 'data2' parameter
signalregression.brms <- brm(Density ~ s(Bins,by=donuts),data = Data,data2=list(Bins = 10^matrix(rep(1:4,times = dim(Data)[1]),ncol = 4,byrow =T),donuts=as.matrix(Data[,c(c("d0_10","d0_100","d0_1000","d0_10000"))])))
#Error in names(dat) <- object$term :
'names' attribute [1] must be the same length as the vector [0]
None of the above worked; each had their own errors and it was difficult troubleshooting them because I couldn't find answers or examples online that were of a similar nature in the context of brms.
I was able to use the above techniques just fine for gam(), in the mgcv package - you don't have to define a data.frame using 'data', you can call on variables defined outside of the gam() formula, and you can make matrices inside the gam() function itself. See below:
library(mgcv)
signalregression2 <- gam(Data$Density ~ s(Bins,by = as.matrix(Data[,c("d0_10","d0_100","d0_1000","d0_10000")]),k=3))
#Works!
It seems like brms is less flexible... :(
My question: does anyone have any suggestions on how to make my brm() function run?
Thank you very much!
My understanding of signal regression is limited enough that I'm not convinced this is correct, but I think it's at least a step in the right direction. The problem seems to be that brm() expects everything in its formula to be a column in data. So we can get the model to compile by ensuring all the things we want are present in data:
library(tidyverse)
signalregression.brms = brm(Density ~
s(cbind(d0_10_bin, d0_100_bin, d0_1000_bin, d0_10000_bin),
by = cbind(d0_10, d0_100, d0_1000, d0_10000),
k = 3),
data = Data %>%
mutate(d0_10_bin = 10,
d0_100_bin = 100,
d0_1000_bin = 1000,
d0_10000_bin = 10000))
Writing out each column by hand is a little annoying; I'm sure there are more general solutions.
For reference, here are my installed package versions:
map_chr(unname(unlist(pacman::p_depends(brms)[c("Depends", "Imports")])), ~ paste(., ": ", pacman::p_version(.), sep = ""))
[1] "Rcpp: 1.0.6" "methods: 4.0.3" "rstan: 2.21.2" "ggplot2: 3.3.3"
[5] "loo: 2.4.1" "Matrix: 1.2.18" "mgcv: 1.8.33" "rstantools: 2.1.1"
[9] "bayesplot: 1.8.0" "shinystan: 2.5.0" "projpred: 2.0.2" "bridgesampling: 1.1.2"
[13] "glue: 1.4.2" "future: 1.21.0" "matrixStats: 0.58.0" "nleqslv: 3.3.2"
[17] "nlme: 3.1.149" "coda: 0.19.4" "abind: 1.4.5" "stats: 4.0.3"
[21] "utils: 4.0.3" "parallel: 4.0.3" "grDevices: 4.0.3" "backports: 1.2.1"
I have 30 datasets that are conbined in a data list. I wanted to analyze spatial point pattern by L function along with randomisation test. Codes are following.
The first code works well for a single dataset (data1) but once it is applied to a list of dataset with lapply() function as shown in 2nd code, it gives me a very long error like so,
"Error in Kcross(X, i, j, ...) : No points have mark i = Acoraceae
Error in envelopeEngine(X = X, fun = fun, simul = simrecipe, nsim =
nsim, : Exceeded maximum number of errors"
Can anybody tell me what is wrong with 2nd code?
grp <- factor(data1$species)
window <- ripras(data1$utmX, data1$utmY)
pp.grp <- ppp(data1$utmX, data1$utmY, window=window, marks=grp)
L.grp <- alltypes(pp.grp, Lest, correlation = "Ripley")
LE.grp <- alltypes(pp.grp, Lcross, nsim = 100, envelope = TRUE)
plot(L.grp)
plot(LE.grp)
L.LE.sp <- lapply(data.list, function(x) {
grp <- factor(x$species)
window <- ripras(x$utmX, x$utmY)
pp.grp <- ppp(x$utmX, x$utmY, window = window, marks = grp)
L.grp <- alltypes(pp.grp, Lest, correlation = "Ripley")
LE.grp <- alltypes(pp.grp, Lcross, envelope = TRUE)
result <- list(L.grp=L.grp, LE.grp=LE.grp)
return(result)
})
plot(L.LE.sp$LE.grp[1])
This question is about the R package spatstat.
It would help if you could add a minimal working example including data which demonstrate this problem.
If that is not available, please generate the error on your computer, then type traceback() and capture the output and post it here. This will trace the location of the error.
Without this information, my best guess is the following:
The error message says No points have mark i=Acoraceae. That means that the code is expecting a point pattern to include points of type Acoraceae but found that there were none. This can happen because in alltypes(... envelope=TRUE) the code generates random point patterns according to complete spatial randomness. In the simulated patterns, the number of points of type Acoraceae (say) will be random according to a Poisson distribution with a mean equal to the number of points of type Acoraceae in the observed data. If the number of Acoraceae in the actual data is small then there is a reasonable chance that the simulated pattern will contain no Acoraceae at all. This is probably what is causing the error message No points have mark i=Acoraceae.
If this interpretation is correct then you should be able to suppress the error by including the argument fix.marks=TRUE, that is,
alltypes(pp.grp, Lcross, envelope=TRUE, fix.marks=TRUE, nsim=99)
I'm not suggesting this is necessarily appropriate for your application, but this should remove the error message if my guess is correct.
In the latest development version of spatstat, available on github, the code for envelope has been tweaked to detect this error.
I'm fairly new to using the caret library and it's causing me some problems. Any
help/advice would be appreciated. My situations are as follows:
I'm trying to run a general linear model on some data and, when I run it
through the confusionMatrix, I get 'the data and reference factors must have
the same number of levels'. I know what this error means (I've run into it before), but I've double and triple checked my data manipulation and it all looks correct (I'm using the right variables in the right places), so I'm not sure why the two values in the confusionMatrix are disagreeing. I've run almost the exact same code for a different variable and it works fine.
I went through every variable and everything was balanced until I got to the
confusionMatrix predict. I discovered this by doing the following:
a <- table(testing2$hold1yes0no)
a[1]+a[2]
1543
b <- table(predict(modelFit,trainTR2))
dim(b)
[1] 1538
Those two values shouldn't disagree. Where are the missing 5 rows?
My code is below:
set.seed(2382)
inTrain2 <- createDataPartition(y=HOLD$hold1yes0no, p = 0.6, list = FALSE)
training2 <- HOLD[inTrain2,]
testing2 <- HOLD[-inTrain2,]
preProc2 <- preProcess(training2[-c(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)], method="BoxCox")
trainPC2 <- predict(preProc2, training2[-c(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)])
trainTR2 <- predict(preProc2, testing2[-c(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)])
modelFit <- train(training2$hold1yes0no ~ ., method ="glm", data = trainPC2)
confusionMatrix(testing2$hold1yes0no, predict(modelFit,trainTR2))
I'm not sure as I don't know your data structure, but I wonder if this is due to the way you set up your modelFit, using the formula method. In this case, you are specifying y = training2$hold1yes0no and x = everything else. Perhaps you should try:
modelFit <- train(trainPC2, training2$hold1yes0no, method="glm")
Which specifies y = training2$hold1yes0no and x = trainPC2.
I originally had a data frame composed of 12 columns in N rows. The last column is my class (0 or 1). I had to convert my entire data frame to numeric with
training <- sapply(training.temp,as.numeric)
But then I thought I needed the class column to be a factor column to use the randomforest() tool as a classifier, so I did
training[,"Class"] <- factor(training[,ncol(training)])
I proceed to creating the tree with
training_rf <- randomForest(Class ~., data = trainData, importance = TRUE, do.trace = 100)
But I'm getting two errors:
1: In Ops.factor(training[, "Status"], factor(training[, ncol(training)])) :
<= this is not relevant for factors (roughly translated)
2: In randomForest.default(m, y, ...) :
The response has five or fewer unique values. Are you sure you want to do regression?
I would appreciate it if someone could point out the formatting mistake I'm making.
Thanks!
So the issue is actually quite simple. It turns out my training data was an atomic vector. So it first had to be converted as a data frame. So I needed to add the following line:
training <- as.data.frame(training)
Problem solved!
First, your coercion to a factor is not working because of syntax errors. Second, you should always use indexing when specifying a RF model. Here are changes in your code that should make it work.
training <- sapply(training.temp,as.numeric)
training[,"Class"] <- as.factor(training[,"Class"])
training_rf <- randomForest(x=training[,1:(ncol(training)-1)], y=training[,"Class"],
importance=TRUE, do.trace=100)
# You can also coerce to a factor directly in the model statement
training_rf <- randomForest(x=training[,1:(ncol(training)-1)], y=as.factor(training[,"Class"]),
importance=TRUE, do.trace=100)