I am new to R and trying to save my svm model in R and have read the documentation but still do not understand what is wrong.
I am getting the error "object is not a matrix" which would seem to mean that my data is not a matrix, but it is... so something is missing.
My data is defined as:
data = read.table("data.csv")
trainSet = as.data.frame(data[,1:(ncol(data)-1)])
Where the last line is my label
I am trying to define my model as:
svm.model <- svm(type ~ ., data=trainSet, type='C-classification', kernel='polynomial',scale=FALSE)
This seems like it should be correct but I am having trouble finding other examples.
Here is my code so far:
# load libraries
require(e1071)
require(pracma)
require(kernlab)
options(warn=-1)
# load dataset
SVMtimes = 1
KERNEL="polynomial"
DEGREE = 2
data = read.table("head.csv")
results10foldAll=c()
# Cross Fold for training and validation datasets
for(timesRun in 1:SVMtimes) {
cat("Running SVM = ",timesRun," result = ")
trainSet = as.data.frame(data[,1:(ncol(data)-1)])
trainClasses = as.factor(data[,ncol(data)])
model = svm(trainSet, trainClasses, type="C-classification",
kernel = KERNEL, degree = DEGREE, coef0=1, cost=1,
cachesize = 10000, cross = 10)
accAll = model$accuracies
cat(mean(accAll), "/", sd(accAll),"\n")
results10foldAll = rbind(results10foldAll, c(mean(accAll),sd(accAll)))
}
# create model
svm.model <- svm(type ~ ., data = trainSet, type='C-classification', kernel='polynomial',scale=FALSE)
An example of one of my samples would be:
10.135338 7.214543 5.758917 6.361316 0.000000 18.455875 14.082668 31
Here, trainSet is a data frame but in the svm.model function it expects data to be a matrix(where you are assigning trainSet to data). Hence, set data = as.matrix(trainSet). This should work fine.
Indeed as pointed out by #user5196900 you need a matrix to run the svm(). However beware that matrix object means all columns have same datatypes, all numeric or all categorical/factors. If this is true for your data as.matrix() may be fine.
In practice more than often people want to model.matrix() or sparse.model.matrix() (from package Matrix) which gives dummy columns for categorical variables, while having single column for numerical variables. But a matrix indeed.
Related
there has been a similar question to mine 6 years+ ago and it hasn't been solve (R -- Can I apply the train function in caret to a list of data frames?)
This is why I am bringing up this topic again.
I'm writing my own functions for my big R project at the moment and I'm wondering if there is an opportunity to sum up the model training function train() of the pakage caret for different dataframes with different predictors.
My function should look like this:
lda_ex <- function(data, predictor){
model <- train(predictor ~., data,
method = "lda",
trControl = trainControl(method = "none"),
preProc = c("center","scale"))
return(model)
}
Using it afterwards should work like this:
data_iris <- iris
predictor_iris <- "Species"
iris_res <- lda_ex(data = data_iris, predictor = predictor_iris)
Unfortunately the R formula is not able to deal with a variable as input as far as I tried.
Is there something I am missing?
Thank you in advance for helping me out!
Solving this would help me A LOT to keep my function sheet clean and safe work for sure.
By writing predictor_iris <- "Species", you are basically saving a string object in predictor_iris. Thus, when you run lda_ex, I guess you incur in some error concerning the formula object in train(), since you are trying to predict a string using vectors of covariates.
Indeed, I tried the following toy example:
X = rnorm(1000)
Y = runif(1000)
predictor = "Y"
lm(predictor ~ X)
which gives an error about differences in the lengths of variables.
Let me modify your function:
lda_ex <- function(data, formula){
model <- train(formula, data,
method = "lda",
trControl = trainControl(method = "none"),
preProc = c("center","scale"))
return(model)
}
The key difference is that now we must pass in the whole formula, instead of the predictor only. In that way, we avoid the string-related problem.
library(caret) # Recall to specify the packages needed to reproduce your examples!
data_iris <- iris
formula_iris = Species ~ . # Key difference!
iris_res <- lda_ex(data = data_iris, formula = formula_iris)
library(mboost)
### a simple two-dimensional example: cars data
cars.gb <- gamboost(dist ~ speed, data = cars, dfbase = 4,
control = boost_control(mstop = 50))
set.seed(1)
cars_new <- cars + rnorm(nrow(cars))
> predict(cars.gb, newdata = cars_new$speed)
Error in check_newdata(newdata, blg, mf) :
‘newdata’ must contain all predictor variables, which were used to specify the model.
I fit a model using the example on the help(gamboost) page. I want to use this model to predict on a new dataset, cars_new, but encountered the above error. How can I fix this?
predict function looks for a variable called speed but when you subset it with $ sign it has no name anymore.
so, this variant of prediction works;
predict(cars.gb, newdata = data.frame(speed = cars_new$speed))
or keep the original name as is;
predict(cars.gb, newdata = cars_new['speed'])
I'm new in R and I'm currently working with RandomForest Analysis.
I need to create at least 100 replicates of a RF model, each one with different test/train data.
I would like to automate the task wrapping the code into a loop if that's possible, and save the results of every model.
Without a loop, I have to run the code every time and manually write the output.
This is my code:
#split data into 80 for training/20 for testing
obs_split <- obs_split %>%
split(if_else(runif(nrow(.)) <= 0.8, "train", "test"))
map_int(obs_split, nrow)
# grow random forest with ranger package
detection_freq <- mean(obs_split$train$species_observed)
# ranger requires a factor response to do classification
obs_split$train$species_observed <- factor(obs_split$train$species_observed)
rf <- ranger(formula = species_observed ~ .,
data = obs_split$train,
importance = "impurity",
probability = TRUE,
replace = TRUE,
sample.fraction = c(detection_freq, detection_freq))
I would appreciate any solution! Thank you
I have a set of CSVs with a result column to train, and a set of test CSVs without the result column.
library(h2o)
h2o.init()
train <- read.csv(train_file, header=T)
train.h2o <- as.h2o(train)
y <- "Result"
x <- setdiff(names(train.h2o), y)
model <- h2o.deeplearning(x = x,
y = y,
training_frame = train.h2o,
model_id = "my_model",
epochs = 5000,
hidden = c(50),
stopping_rounds=5,
stopping_metric="misclassification",
stopping_tolerance=0.001,
seed = 1)
test <- read.csv(test_file, header=T)
test.h2o <- as.h2o(test)
pred <- h2o.predict(model,test.h2o)
When I try to predict the outcome with test data, I get a bunch of errors like:
1: In doTryCatch(return(expr), name, parentenv, handler) :
Test/Validation dataset column 'ColumnName' has levels not trained on: [ABCD, BCDE]
H2O used to be able to handle data present in test but not during training. I found some posts online where they say they do. But it is not working for me.
How can I avoid these errors, and predict a value for the test data?
There are 2 methods you can have a try:
Use factor as oppose to character
Before feeding data into machine learning function, you can combine your train and test data, and convert character variable to factor.
Hence unique values will be recorded as level info even you split combined data later.
library(h2o)
h2o.init()
#using dummy data as combined training and testing data
prostatePath = system.file("extdata", "prostate.csv", package = "h2o")
prostate.hex = h2o.importFile(path = prostatePath, destination_frame = "prostate.hex")
#assuming GLEASON is the character variable, and transform it to factor
prostate.hex$GLEASON <- h2o.asfactor(prostate.hex$GLEASON)
#split data such that 0,4,5,8 only in test set, and not in train set.
h2o.test <- prostate.hex[prostate.hex$GLEASON %in% c("0","4","5","8"),]
h2o.train <- prostate.hex[!prostate.hex$GLEASON %in% c("0","4","5","8"),]
#train model
model <- h2o.glm(y = "CAPSULE", x = c("AGE","RACE","PSA","DCAPS","GLEASON"), training_frame = h2o.train,
family = "binomial", nfolds = 0)
#predict without error
pred <- predict(model,h2o.test)
Use one-hot-encoding Explicitly
I know that h2o machine learning functions provide internal encoding methods (via categorical_encoding parameters) including one-hot-encoding, which turns character variable into lots of 1/0 integer variables.
As oppose to use this technique implicitly, you can use it explicitly. Hence those levels don't exist in training will not be used in model. New levels in testing are simply not used for prediction.
In the past few days I have developed multiple PLS models in R for spectral data (wavebands as explanatory variables) and various vegetation parameters (as individual response variables). In total, the dataset comprises of 56. The first 28 (training set) have been used for model calibration, now all I want to do is to predict the response values for the remaining 28 observations in the tesset. For some reason, however, R keeps on the returning the fitted values of the calibration set for a given number of components rather than predictions for the independent test set. Here is what the model looks like in short.
# first simulate some data
set.seed(123)
bands=101
data <- data.frame(matrix(runif(56*bands),ncol=bands))
colnames(data) <- paste0(1:bands)
data$height <- rpois(56,10)
data$fbm <- rpois(56,10)
data$nitrogen <- rpois(56,10)
data$carbon <- rpois(56,10)
data$chl <- rpois(56,10)
data$ID <- 1:56
data <- as.data.frame(data)
caldata <- data[1:28,] # define model training set
valdata <- data[29:56,] # define model testing set
# define explanatory variables (x)
spectra <- caldata[,1:101]
# build PLS model using training data only
library(pls)
refl.pls <- plsr(height ~ spectra, data = caldata, ncomp = 10, validation =
"LOO", jackknife = TRUE)
It was then identified that a model comprising of 3 components yielded the best performance without over-fitting. Hence, the following command was used to predict the values of the 28 observations in the testing set using the above calibrated PLS model with 3 components:
predict(refl.pls, ncomp = 3, newdata = valdata)
Sensible as the output may seem, I soon discovered that all this piece of code generates are the fitted values of the PLS model for the calibration/training data, rather than predictions. I discovered this because the below code, in which newdata = is omitted, yields identical results.
predict(refl.pls, ncomp = 3)
Surely something must be going wrong, although I cannot seem to find out what specifically is. Is there someone out there who can, and is willing to help me move in the right direction?
I think the problem is with the nature of the input data. Looking at ?plsr and str(yarn) that goes with the example, plsr requires a very specific data frame that I find tricky to work with. The input data frame should have a matrix as one of its elements (in your case, the spectral data). I think the following works correctly (note I changed the size of the training set so that it wasn't half the original data, for troubleshooting):
library("pls")
set.seed(123)
bands=101
spectra = matrix(runif(56*bands),ncol=bands)
DF <- data.frame(spectra = I(spectra),
height = rpois(56,10),
fbm = rpois(56,10),
nitrogen = rpois(56,10),
carbon = rpois(56,10),
chl = rpois(56,10),
ID = 1:56)
class(DF$spectra) <- "matrix" # just to be certain, it was "AsIs"
str(DF)
DF$train <- rep(FALSE, 56)
DF$train[1:20] <- TRUE
refl.pls <- plsr(height ~ spectra, data = DF, ncomp = 10, validation =
"LOO", jackknife = TRUE, subset = train)
res <- predict(refl.pls, ncomp = 3, newdata = DF[!DF$train,])
Note that I got the spectral data into the data frame as a matrix by protecting it with I which equates to AsIs. There might be a more standard way to do this, but it works. As I said, to me a matrix inside of a data frame is not completely intuitive or easy to grok.
As to why your version didn't work quite right, I think the best explanation is that everything needs to be in the one data frame you pass to plsr for the data sources to be completely unambiguous.