For those of you interested in the fast growing areas of applications of Machine Learning, this article about Applications and techniques for fast machine learning in science may be interesting.
It has several interesting perspectives and highly interesting applications that link scientific discoveries with efficient software and hardware. The emphasis is onintegrating power Machine Learning methods into the real-time experimental data processing loop to accelerate scientific discovery.
For neural networks and regression, should I use a design matrix with information about a polynomial fit or not? Discuss pros and cons. The example here shows some of these issues.
"""
Code to test Ridge and NNs using Scikit-Learn only
"""
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn import linear_model
from sklearn.neural_network import MLPRegressor
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score
import seaborn as sns
def MSE(y_data,y_model):
n = np.size(y_model)
return np.sum((y_data-y_model)**2)/n
# A seed just to ensure that the random numbers are the same for every run.
# Useful for eventual debugging.
np.random.seed(315)
n = 100
x = np.random.rand(n)
y = np.exp(-x**2) + 1.5 * np.exp(-(x-2)**2)
Maxpolydegree = 5
X = np.zeros((n,Maxpolydegree-1))
for degree in range(1,Maxpolydegree): #No intercept column
X[:,degree-1] = x**(degree)
# We split the data in test and training data
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, test_size=0.2)
# Decide which values of lambda to use
nlambdas = 10
lmbd_vals = np.logspace(-4, 0, nlambdas)
MSERidgePredict = np.zeros(nlambdas)
for i in range(nlambdas):
lmb = lmbd_vals[i]
RegRidge = linear_model.Ridge(lmb)
RegRidge.fit(X_train,y_train)
ypredictRidge = RegRidge.predict(X_test)
MSERidgePredict[i] = MSE(y_test,ypredictRidge)
plt.figure()
plt.plot(np.log10(lmbd_vals), MSERidgePredict, 'g--', label = 'MSE SL Ridge Test')
plt.xlabel('log10(lambda)')
plt.ylabel('MSE')
plt.legend()
plt.show()
# Neural Network part
n_hidden_neurons = 50
epochs = 100
# store models for later use
eta_vals = np.logspace(-4, 0, 10)
# store the models for later use
DNN_scikit = np.zeros((len(eta_vals), len(lmbd_vals)), dtype=object)
test_accuracy = np.zeros((len(eta_vals), len(lmbd_vals)))
sns.set()
for i, eta in enumerate(eta_vals):
for j, lmbd in enumerate(lmbd_vals):
dnn = MLPRegressor(hidden_layer_sizes=(n_hidden_neurons), activation='logistic',
alpha=lmbd, learning_rate_init=eta, max_iter=epochs)
dnn.fit(X_train, y_train)
ypredictMLP = dnn.predict(X_test)
test_accuracy[i][j] = MSE(ypredictMLP, y_test)
fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize = (10, 10))
sns.heatmap(test_accuracy, annot=True, ax=ax, cmap="viridis")
ax.set_title("Training Accuracy")
ax.set_ylabel("$\eta$")
ax.set_xlabel("$\lambda$")
plt.show()
# Now we redefine our design matrix to include only the x-values and try out our NN
X = np.zeros((n,1))
X[:,0] = x
# We split the data in test and training data again
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, test_size=0.2)
# Repeat the NN calculation
DNN_scikit = np.zeros((len(eta_vals), len(lmbd_vals)), dtype=object)
test_accuracy = np.zeros((len(eta_vals), len(lmbd_vals)))
sns.set()
for i, eta in enumerate(eta_vals):
for j, lmbd in enumerate(lmbd_vals):
dnn = MLPRegressor(hidden_layer_sizes=(n_hidden_neurons), activation='logistic',
alpha=lmbd, learning_rate_init=eta, max_iter=epochs)
dnn.fit(X_train, y_train)
ypredictMLP = dnn.predict(X_test)
test_accuracy[i][j] = MSE(ypredictMLP, y_test)
fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize = (10, 10))
sns.heatmap(test_accuracy, annot=True, ax=ax, cmap="viridis")
ax.set_title("Training Accuracy")
ax.set_ylabel("$\eta$")
ax.set_xlabel("$\lambda$")
plt.show()
When developing your own gradient descent code, it is useful to test it first on a standard ordinary least squares problem. Then the Hessian matrix is determined by the design matrix only, namely \( \boldsymbol{H}\propto \boldsymbol{X}^T\boldsymbol{X} \).
The optimal learning rate is determined by the inverse of the largest eigenvalue of \( \boldsymbol{H} \). This can be used as a guideline for the learning rate guess.
Keeping this fixed, can aid in studyng the dependence on say the mean square value for OLS as function of the number of batches and epochs in your stochastic gradient descent code. See for example the code examples for week 40 (right before the neural network material).
For the principal component analysis, see slides from week 43, in particular from slide 28 and forward
Variance is a measure of the variability of the data you have. Potentially the number of components is infinite, so you want to "squeeze" the most information in each component of the finite set you build.
If, to exaggerate, you were to select a single principal component, you would want it to account for the most variability possible: hence the search for maximum variance, so that the one component collects the most "uniqueness" from the data set.
Maximizing the component vector variances is the same as maximizing the 'uniqueness' of those vectors. The vectors are as distant from each other as possible (orthogonal to each other).
Take for example a situation where you have 2 lines that are orthogonal in a 3D space. You can capture the environment much more completely with those orthogonal lines than 2 lines that are parallel (or nearly parallel). When applied to very high dimensional states using very few vectors, this becomes a much more important relationship among the vectors to maintain. In a linear algebra sense you want independent rows to be produced by PCA, otherwise some of those rows will be redundant.
In general terms cluster analysis, or clustering, is the task of grouping a data-set into different distinct categories based on some measure of equality of the data. This measure is often referred to as a metric or similarity measure in the literature (note: sometimes we deal with a dissimilarity measure instead). Usually, these metrics are formulated as some kind of distance function between points in a high-dimensional space.
The simplest, and also the most common is the Euclidean distance.
The simplest of all clustering algorithms is the k-means algorithm , sometimes also referred to as Lloyds algorithm. It is the simplest and also the most common. From its simplicity it obtains both strengths and weaknesses. These will be discussed in more detail later. The \( k \)-means algorithm is a centroid based clustering algorithm.
Assume, we are given \( n \) data points and we wish to split the data into \( K < n \) different categories, or clusters. We label each cluster by an integer
$$ k\in\{1, \cdots, K \}. $$In the basic k-means algorithm each point is assigned to only one cluster \( k \), and these assignments are non-injective i.e. many-to-one. We can think of these mappings as an encoder \( k = C(i) \), which assigns the \( i \)-th data-point \( \bf x_i \) to the \( k \)-th cluster.
\( k \)-means algorithm in words:
We assume we have \( n \) data-points
$$ \begin{equation}\label{eq:kmeanspoints} \boldsymbol{x_i} = \{x_{i, 1}, \cdots, x_{i, p}\}\in\mathbb{R}^p. \end{equation} $$which we wish to group into \( K < n \) clusters. For our dissimilarity measure we use the squared Euclidean distance
$$ \begin{equation}\label{eq:squaredeuclidean} d(\boldsymbol{x_i}, \boldsymbol{x_i'}) = \sum_{j=1}^p(x_{ij} - x_{i'j})^2 = ||\boldsymbol{x_i} - \boldsymbol{x_{i'}}||^2 \end{equation} $$We define the so called within-cluster point scatter which gives us a measure of how close each data point assigned to the same cluster tends to be to the all the others.
$$ \begin{equation}\label{eq:withincluster} W(C) = \frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{C(i)=k} \sum_{C(i')=k}d(\boldsymbol{x_i}, \boldsymbol{x_{i'}}) = \sum_{k=1}^KN_k\sum_{C(i)=k}||\boldsymbol{x_i} - \boldsymbol{\overline{x_k}}||^2 \end{equation} $$where \( \boldsymbol{\overline{x_k}} \) is the mean vector associated with the \( k \)-th cluster, and \( N_k = \sum_{i=1}^nI(C(i) = k) \), where the \( I() \) notation is similar to the Kronecker delta (Commonly used in statistics, it just means that when \( i = k \) we have the encoder \( C(i) \)). In other words, the within-cluster scatter measures the compactness of each cluster with respect to the data points assigned to each cluster. This is the quantity that the \( k \)-means algorithm aims to minimize. We refer to this quantity \( W(C) \) as the within cluster scatter because of its relation to the total scatter.
We have
$$ \begin{equation}\label{eq:totalscatter} T = W(C) + B(C) = \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{i'=1}^nd(\boldsymbol{x_i}, \boldsymbol{x_{i'}}) = \frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{C(i)=k} \Big(\sum_{C(i') = k}d(\boldsymbol{x_i}, \boldsymbol{x_{i'}}) + \sum_{C(i')\neq k}d(\boldsymbol{x_i}, \boldsymbol{x_{i'}})\Big). \end{equation} $$This is a quantity that is conserved throughout the \( k \)-means algorithm. It can be thought of as the total amount of information in the data, and it is composed of the aforementioned within-cluster scatter and the between-cluster scatter \( B(C) \). In methods such as principle component analysis the total scatter is not conserved.
Given a cluster mean \( \boldsymbol{m_k} \) we define the total cluster variance
$$ \begin{equation}\label{eq:totalclustervariance} \min_{C, \{\boldsymbol{m_k}\}_1^K}\sum_{k=1}^KN_k\sum||\boldsymbol{x_i} - \boldsymbol{m_k}||^2 \end{equation} $$Now we have all the pieces necessary to formally revisit the \( k \)-means algorithm.
The \( k \)-means clustering algorithm goes as follows
Let us now program the most basic version of the algorithm using nothing but Python with numpy arrays. This code is kept intentionally simple to gradually progress our understanding. There is no vectorization of any kind, and even most helper functions are not utilized.
We need first a dataset to do our cluster analysis on. In our case this is a plain vanilla data set using random numbers using a Gaussian distribution.
import time
import numpy as np
import tensorflow as tf
from matplotlib import image
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.cluster import KMeans
from IPython.display import display
np.random.seed(2021)
Next we define functions, for ease of use later, to generate Gaussians and to set up our toy data set.
def gaussian_points(dim=2, n_points=1000, mean_vector=np.array([0, 0]),
sample_variance=1):
"""
Very simple custom function to generate gaussian distributed point clusters
with variable dimension, number of points, means in each direction
(must match dim) and sample variance.
Inputs:
dim (int)
n_points (int)
mean_vector (np.array) (where index 0 is x, index 1 is y etc.)
sample_variance (float)
Returns:
data (np.array): with dimensions (dim x n_points)
"""
mean_matrix = np.zeros(dim) + mean_vector
covariance_matrix = np.eye(dim) * sample_variance
data = np.random.multivariate_normal(mean_matrix, covariance_matrix,
n_points)
return data
def generate_simple_clustering_dataset(dim=2, n_points=1000, plotting=True,
return_data=True):
"""
Toy model to illustrate k-means clustering
"""
data1 = gaussian_points(mean_vector=np.array([5, 5]))
data2 = gaussian_points()
data3 = gaussian_points(mean_vector=np.array([1, 4.5]))
data4 = gaussian_points(mean_vector=np.array([5, 1]))
data = np.concatenate((data1, data2, data3, data4), axis=0)
if plotting:
fig, ax = plt.subplots()
ax.scatter(data[:, 0], data[:, 1], alpha=0.2)
ax.set_title('Toy Model Dataset')
plt.show()
if return_data:
return data
data = generate_simple_clustering_dataset()
With the above dataset we start implementing the \( k \)-means algorithm.
n_samples, dimensions = data.shape
n_clusters = 4
# we randomly initialize our centroids
np.random.seed(2021)
centroids = data[np.random.choice(n_samples, n_clusters, replace=False), :]
distances = np.zeros((n_samples, n_clusters))
# first we need to calculate the distance to each centroid from our data
for k in range(n_clusters):
for n in range(n_samples):
dist = 0
for d in range(dimensions):
dist += np.abs(data[n, d] - centroids[k, d])**2
distances[n, k] = dist
# we initialize an array to keep track of to which cluster each point belongs
# the way we set it up here the index tracks which point and the value which
# cluster the point belongs to
cluster_labels = np.zeros(n_samples, dtype='int')
# next we loop through our samples and for every point assign it to the cluster
# to which it has the smallest distance to
for n in range(n_samples):
# tracking variables (all of this is basically just an argmin)
smallest = 1e10
smallest_row_index = 1e10
for k in range(n_clusters):
if distances[n, k] < smallest:
smallest = distances[n, k]
smallest_row_index = k
cluster_labels[n] = smallest_row_index
fig = plt.figure()
ax = fig.add_subplot()
unique_cluster_labels = np.unique(cluster_labels)
for i in unique_cluster_labels:
ax.scatter(data[cluster_labels == i, 0],
data[cluster_labels == i, 1],
label = i,
alpha = 0.2)
ax.scatter(centroids[:, 0], centroids[:, 1], c='black')
ax.set_title("First Grouping of Points to Centroids")
plt.show()
So what do we have so far? We have 'picked' \( k \) centroids at random from our data points. There are other ways of more intelligently choosing their initializations, however for our purposes randomly is fine. Then we have initialized an array 'distances' which holds the information of the distance, or dissimilarity, of every point to of our centroids. Finally, we have initialized an array 'cluster_labels' which according to our distances array holds the information of to which centroid every point is assigned. This was the first pass of our algorithm. Essentially, all we need to do now is repeat the distance and assignment steps above until we have reached a desired convergence or a maximum amount of iterations.
max_iterations = 100
tolerance = 1e-8
for iteration in range(max_iterations):
prev_centroids = centroids.copy()
for k in range(n_clusters):
# this array will be used to update our centroid positions
vector_mean = np.zeros(dimensions)
mean_divisor = 0
for n in range(n_samples):
if cluster_labels[n] == k:
vector_mean += data[n, :]
mean_divisor += 1
# update according to the k means
centroids[k, :] = vector_mean / mean_divisor
# we find the dissimilarity
for k in range(n_clusters):
for n in range(n_samples):
dist = 0
for d in range(dimensions):
dist += np.abs(data[n, d] - centroids[k, d])**2
distances[n, k] = dist
# assign each point
for n in range(n_samples):
smallest = 1e10
smallest_row_index = 1e10
for k in range(n_clusters):
if distances[n, k] < smallest:
smallest = distances[n, k]
smallest_row_index = k
cluster_labels[n] = smallest_row_index
# convergence criteria
centroid_difference = np.sum(np.abs(centroids - prev_centroids))
if centroid_difference < tolerance:
print(f'Converged at iteration {iteration}')
break
elif iteration == max_iterations:
print(f'Did not converge in {max_iterations} iterations')
We now have a simple , un-optimized \( k \)-means clustering implementation. Lets plot the final result
fig = plt.figure()
ax = fig.add_subplot()
unique_cluster_labels = np.unique(cluster_labels)
for i in unique_cluster_labels:
ax.scatter(data[cluster_labels == i, 0],
data[cluster_labels == i, 1],
label = i,
alpha = 0.2)
ax.scatter(centroids[:, 0], centroids[:, 1], c='black')
ax.set_title("Final Result of K-means Clustering")
plt.show()
def naive_kmeans(data, n_clusters=4, max_iterations=100, tolerance=1e-8):
start_time = time.time()
n_samples, dimensions = data.shape
n_clusters = 4
#np.random.seed(2021)
centroids = data[np.random.choice(n_samples, n_clusters, replace=False), :]
distances = np.zeros((n_samples, n_clusters))
for k in range(n_clusters):
for n in range(n_samples):
dist = 0
for d in range(dimensions):
dist += np.abs(data[n, d] - centroids[k, d])**2
distances[n, k] = dist
cluster_labels = np.zeros(n_samples, dtype='int')
for n in range(n_samples):
smallest = 1e10
smallest_row_index = 1e10
for k in range(n_clusters):
if distances[n, k] < smallest:
smallest = distances[n, k]
smallest_row_index = k
cluster_labels[n] = smallest_row_index
for iteration in range(max_iterations):
prev_centroids = centroids.copy()
for k in range(n_clusters):
vector_mean = np.zeros(dimensions)
mean_divisor = 0
for n in range(n_samples):
if cluster_labels[n] == k:
vector_mean += data[n, :]
mean_divisor += 1
centroids[k, :] = vector_mean / mean_divisor
for k in range(n_clusters):
for n in range(n_samples):
dist = 0
for d in range(dimensions):
dist += np.abs(data[n, d] - centroids[k, d])**2
distances[n, k] = dist
for n in range(n_samples):
smallest = 1e10
smallest_row_index = 1e10
for k in range(n_clusters):
if distances[n, k] < smallest:
smallest = distances[n, k]
smallest_row_index = k
cluster_labels[n] = smallest_row_index
centroid_difference = np.sum(np.abs(centroids - prev_centroids))
if centroid_difference < tolerance:
print(f'Converged at iteration {iteration}')
print(f'Runtime: {time.time() - start_time} seconds')
return cluster_labels, centroids
print(f'Did not converge in {max_iterations} iterations')
print(f'Runtime: {time.time() - start_time} seconds')
return cluster_labels, centroids
We start here with the most basic algorithm, the so-called decision tree. With this basic algorithm we can in turn build more complex networks, spanning from homogeneous and heterogenous forests (bagging, random forests and more) to one of the most popular supervised algorithms nowadays, the extreme gradient boosting, or just XGBoost. But let us start with the simplest possible ingredient.
Decision trees are supervised learning algorithms used for both, classification and regression tasks.
The main idea of decision trees is to find those descriptive features which contain the most information regarding the target feature and then split the dataset along the values of these features such that the target feature values for the resulting underlying datasets are as pure as possible.
The descriptive features which reproduce best the target/output features are normally said to be the most informative ones. The process of finding the most informative feature is done until we accomplish a stopping criteria where we then finally end up in so called leaf nodes.
A decision tree is typically divided into a root node, the interior nodes, and the final leaf nodes or just leaves. These entities are then connected by so-called branches.
The leaf nodes contain the predictions we will make for new query instances presented to our trained model. This is possible since the model has learned the underlying structure of the training data and hence can, given some assumptions, make predictions about the target feature value (class) of unseen query instances.

This tree was produced using the Wisconsin cancer data (discussed here as well, see code examples below) using Scikit-Learn's decision tree classifier. Here we have used the so-called gini index (see below) to split the various branches.
The overarching approach to decision trees is a top-down approach.
This process is then repeated for the subtree rooted at the new node.
In simplified terms, the process of training a decision tree and predicting the target features of query instances is as follows:
Then we are essentially done!
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.preprocessing import PolynomialFeatures
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression
steps=250
distance=0
x=0
distance_list=[]
steps_list=[]
while x<steps:
distance+=np.random.randint(-1,2)
distance_list.append(distance)
x+=1
steps_list.append(x)
plt.plot(steps_list,distance_list, color='green', label="Random Walk Data")
steps_list=np.asarray(steps_list)
distance_list=np.asarray(distance_list)
X=steps_list[:,np.newaxis]
#Polynomial fits
#Degree 2
poly_features=PolynomialFeatures(degree=2, include_bias=False)
X_poly=poly_features.fit_transform(X)
lin_reg=LinearRegression()
poly_fit=lin_reg.fit(X_poly,distance_list)
b=lin_reg.coef_
c=lin_reg.intercept_
print ("2nd degree coefficients:")
print ("zero power: ",c)
print ("first power: ", b[0])
print ("second power: ",b[1])
z = np.arange(0, steps, .01)
z_mod=b[1]*z**2+b[0]*z+c
fit_mod=b[1]*X**2+b[0]*X+c
plt.plot(z, z_mod, color='r', label="2nd Degree Fit")
plt.title("Polynomial Regression")
plt.xlabel("Steps")
plt.ylabel("Distance")
#Degree 10
poly_features10=PolynomialFeatures(degree=10, include_bias=False)
X_poly10=poly_features10.fit_transform(X)
poly_fit10=lin_reg.fit(X_poly10,distance_list)
y_plot=poly_fit10.predict(X_poly10)
plt.plot(X, y_plot, color='black', label="10th Degree Fit")
plt.legend()
plt.show()
#Decision Tree Regression
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeRegressor
regr_1=DecisionTreeRegressor(max_depth=2)
regr_2=DecisionTreeRegressor(max_depth=5)
regr_3=DecisionTreeRegressor(max_depth=7)
regr_1.fit(X, distance_list)
regr_2.fit(X, distance_list)
regr_3.fit(X, distance_list)
X_test = np.arange(0.0, steps, 0.01)[:, np.newaxis]
y_1 = regr_1.predict(X_test)
y_2 = regr_2.predict(X_test)
y_3=regr_3.predict(X_test)
# Plot the results
plt.figure()
plt.scatter(X, distance_list, s=2.5, c="black", label="data")
plt.plot(X_test, y_1, color="red",
label="max_depth=2", linewidth=2)
plt.plot(X_test, y_2, color="green", label="max_depth=5", linewidth=2)
plt.plot(X_test, y_3, color="m", label="max_depth=7", linewidth=2)
plt.xlabel("Data")
plt.ylabel("Darget")
plt.title("Decision Tree Regression")
plt.legend()
plt.show()
There are mainly two steps
How do we construct the regions \( R_1,\dots,R_J \)? In theory, the regions could have any shape. However, we choose to divide the predictor space into high-dimensional rectangles, or boxes, for simplicity and for ease of interpretation of the resulting predictive model. The goal is to find boxes \( R_1,\dots,R_J \) that minimize the MSE, given by
$$ \sum_{j=1}^J\sum_{i\in R_j}(y_i-\overline{y}_{R_j})^2, $$where \( \overline{y}_{R_j} \) is the mean response for the training observations within box \( j \).
Unfortunately, it is computationally infeasible to consider every possible partition of the feature space into \( J \) boxes. The common strategy is to take a top-down approach
The approach is top-down because it begins at the top of the tree (all observations belong to a single region) and then successively splits the predictor space; each split is indicated via two new branches further down on the tree. It is greedy because at each step of the tree-building process, the best split is made at that particular step, rather than looking ahead and picking a split that will lead to a better tree in some future step.
In order to implement the recursive binary splitting we start by selecting the predictor \( x_j \) and a cutpoint \( s \) that splits the predictor space into two regions \( R_1 \) and \( R_2 \)
$$ \left\{X\vert x_j < s\right\}, $$and
$$ \left\{X\vert x_j \geq s\right\}, $$so that we obtain the lowest MSE, that is
$$ \sum_{i:x_i\in R_j}(y_i-\overline{y}_{R_1})^2+\sum_{i:x_i\in R_2}(y_i-\overline{y}_{R_2})^2, $$which we want to minimize by considering all predictors \( x_1,x_2,\dots,x_p \). We consider also all possible values of \( s \) for each predictor. These values could be determined by randomly assigned numbers or by starting at the midpoint and then proceed till we find an optimal value.
For any \( j \) and \( s \), we define the pair of half-planes where \( \overline{y}_{R_1} \) is the mean response for the training observations in \( R_1(j,s) \), and \( \overline{y}_{R_2} \) is the mean response for the training observations in \( R_2(j,s) \).
Finding the values of \( j \) and \( s \) that minimize the above equation can be done quite quickly, especially when the number of features \( p \) is not too large.
Next, we repeat the process, looking for the best predictor and best cutpoint in order to split the data further so as to minimize the MSE within each of the resulting regions. However, this time, instead of splitting the entire predictor space, we split one of the two previously identified regions. We now have three regions. Again, we look to split one of these three regions further, so as to minimize the MSE. The process continues until a stopping criterion is reached; for instance, we may continue until no region contains more than five observations.
The above procedure is rather straightforward, but leads often to overfitting and unnecessarily large and complicated trees. The basic idea is to grow a large tree \( T_0 \) and then prune it back in order to obtain a subtree. A smaller tree with fewer splits (fewer regions) can lead to smaller variance and better interpretation at the cost of a little more bias.
The so-called Cost complexity pruning algorithm gives us a way to do just this. Rather than considering every possible subtree, we consider a sequence of trees indexed by a nonnegative tuning parameter \( \alpha \).
Read more at the following Scikit-Learn link on pruning.
For each value of \( \alpha \) there corresponds a subtree \( T \in T_0 \) such that
$$ \sum_{m=1}^{\overline{T}}\sum_{i:x_i\in R_m}(y_i-\overline{y}_{R_m})^2+\alpha\overline{T}, $$is as small as possible. Here \( \overline{T} \) is the number of terminal nodes of the tree \( T \) , \( R_m \) is the rectangle (i.e. the subset of predictor space) corresponding to the \( m \)-th terminal node.
The tuning parameter \( \alpha \) controls a trade-off between the subtree’s complexity and its fit to the training data. When \( \alpha = 0 \), then the subtree \( T \) will simply equal \( T_0 \), because then the above equation just measures the training error. However, as \( \alpha \) increases, there is a price to pay for having a tree with many terminal nodes. The above equation will tend to be minimized for a smaller subtree.
It turns out that as we increase \( \alpha \) from zero branches get pruned from the tree in a nested and predictable fashion, so obtaining the whole sequence of subtrees as a function of \( \alpha \) is easy. We can select a value of \( \alpha \) using a validation set or using cross-validation. We then return to the full data set and obtain the subtree corresponding to \( \alpha \).
A classification tree is very similar to a regression tree, except that it is used to predict a qualitative response rather than a quantitative one. Recall that for a regression tree, the predicted response for an observation is given by the mean response of the training observations that belong to the same terminal node. In contrast, for a classification tree, we predict that each observation belongs to the most commonly occurring class of training observations in the region to which it belongs. In interpreting the results of a classification tree, we are often interested not only in the class prediction corresponding to a particular terminal node region, but also in the class proportions among the training observations that fall into that region.
The task of growing a classification tree is quite similar to the task of growing a regression tree. Just as in the regression setting, we use recursive binary splitting to grow a classification tree. However, in the classification setting, the MSE cannot be used as a criterion for making the binary splits. A natural alternative to MSE is the classification error rate. Since we plan to assign an observation in a given region to the most commonly occurring error rate class of training observations in that region, the classification error rate is simply the fraction of the training observations in that region that do not belong to the most common class.
When building a classification tree, either the Gini index or the entropy are typically used to evaluate the quality of a particular split, since these two approaches are more sensitive to node purity than is the classification error rate.
If our targets are the outcome of a classification process that takes for example \( k=1,2,\dots,K \) values, the only thing we need to think of is to set up the splitting criteria for each node.
We define a PDF \( p_{mk} \) that represents the number of observations of a class \( k \) in a region \( R_m \) with \( N_m \) observations. We represent this likelihood function in terms of the proportion \( I(y_i=k) \) of observations of this class in the region \( R_m \) as
$$ p_{mk} = \frac{1}{N_m}\sum_{x_i\in R_m}I(y_i=k). $$We let \( p_{mk} \) represent the majority class of observations in region \( m \). The three most common ways of splitting a node are given by
import os
from sklearn.datasets import load_breast_cancer
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.metrics import confusion_matrix
from sklearn.tree import export_graphviz
from IPython.display import Image
from pydot import graph_from_dot_data
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
cancer = load_breast_cancer()
X = pd.DataFrame(cancer.data, columns=cancer.feature_names)
print(X)
y = pd.Categorical.from_codes(cancer.target, cancer.target_names)
y = pd.get_dummies(y)
print(y)
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, random_state=1)
tree_clf = DecisionTreeClassifier(max_depth=5)
tree_clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
export_graphviz(
tree_clf,
out_file="DataFiles/cancer.dot",
feature_names=cancer.feature_names,
class_names=cancer.target_names,
rounded=True,
filled=True
)
cmd = 'dot -Tpng DataFiles/cancer.dot -o DataFiles/cancer.png'
os.system(cmd)
# Common imports
import numpy as np
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier
from sklearn.datasets import make_moons
from sklearn.tree import export_graphviz
from pydot import graph_from_dot_data
import pandas as pd
import os
np.random.seed(42)
X, y = make_moons(n_samples=100, noise=0.25, random_state=53)
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X,y,random_state=0)
tree_clf = DecisionTreeClassifier(max_depth=5)
tree_clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
export_graphviz(
tree_clf,
out_file="DataFiles/moons.dot",
rounded=True,
filled=True
)
cmd = 'dot -Tpng DataFiles/moons.dot -o DataFiles/moons.png'
os.system(cmd)
Scikit-Learn has also another way to visualize the trees which is very useful, here with the Iris data.
from sklearn.datasets import load_iris
from sklearn import tree
X, y = load_iris(return_X_y=True)
tree_clf = tree.DecisionTreeClassifier()
tree_clf = tree_clf.fit(X, y)
# and then plot the tree
tree.plot_tree(tree_clf)
Alternatively, the tree can also be exported in textual format with the function exporttext. This method doesn’t require the installation of external libraries and is more compact:
from sklearn.datasets import load_iris
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier
from sklearn.tree import export_text
iris = load_iris()
decision_tree = DecisionTreeClassifier(random_state=0, max_depth=2)
decision_tree = decision_tree.fit(iris.data, iris.target)
r = export_text(decision_tree, feature_names=iris['feature_names'])
print(r)
Two algorithms stand out in the set up of decision trees:
We discuss both algorithms with applications here. The popular library Scikit-Learn uses the CART algorithm. For classification problems you can use either the gini index or the entropy to split a tree in two branches.
For classification, the CART algorithm splits the data set in two subsets using a single feature \( k \) and a threshold \( t_k \). This could be for example a threshold set by a number below a certain circumference of a malign tumor.
How do we find these two quantities? We search for the pair \( (k,t_k) \) that produces the purest subset using for example the gini factor \( G \). The cost function it tries to minimize is then
$$ C(k,t_k) = \frac{m_{\mathrm{left}}}{m}G_{\mathrm{left}}+ \frac{m_{\mathrm{right}}}{m}G_{\mathrm{right}}, $$where \( G_{\mathrm{left/right}} \) measures the impurity of the left/right subset and \( m_{\mathrm{left/right}} \) is the number of instances in the left/right subset
Once it has successfully split the training set in two, it splits the subsets using the same logic, then the subsubsets and so on, recursively. It stops recursing once it reaches the maximum depth (defined by the \( max\_depth \) hyperparameter), or if it cannot find a split that will reduce impurity. A few other hyperparameters control additional stopping conditions such as the \( min\_samples\_split \), \( min\_samples\_leaf \), \( min\_weight\_fraction\_leaf \), and \( max\_leaf\_nodes \).
The CART algorithm for regression works is similar to the one for classification except that instead of trying to split the training set in a way that minimizes say the gini or entropy impurity, it now tries to split the training set in a way that minimizes our well-known mean-squared error (MSE). The cost function is now
$$ C(k,t_k) = \frac{m_{\mathrm{left}}}{m}\mathrm{MSE}_{\mathrm{left}}+ \frac{m_{\mathrm{right}}}{m}\mathrm{MSE}_{\mathrm{right}}. $$Here the MSE for a specific node is defined as
$$ \mathrm{MSE}_{\mathrm{node}}=\frac{1}{m_\mathrm{node}}\sum_{i\in \mathrm{node}}(\overline{y}_{\mathrm{node}}-y_i)^2, $$with
$$ \overline{y}_{\mathrm{node}}=\frac{1}{m_\mathrm{node}}\sum_{i\in \mathrm{node}}y_i, $$the mean value of all observations in a specific node.
Without any regularization, the regression task for decision trees, just like for classification tasks, is prone to overfitting.
The example we will look at is a classical one in many Machine Learning applications. Based on various meteorological features, we have several so-called attributes which decide whether we at the end will do some outdoor activity like skiing, going for a bike ride etc etc. The table here contains the feautures outlook, temperature, humidity and wind. The target or output is whether we ride (True=1) or whether we do something else that day (False=0). The attributes for each feature are then sunny, overcast and rain for the outlook, hot, cold and mild for temperature, high and normal for humidity and weak and strong for wind.
The table here summarizes the various attributes and
| Day | Outlook | Temperature | Humidity | Wind | Ride |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sunny | Hot | High | Weak | 0 |
| 2 | Sunny | Hot | High | Strong | 1 |
| 3 | Overcast | Hot | High | Weak | 1 |
| 4 | Rain | Mild | High | Weak | 1 |
| 5 | Rain | Cool | Normal | Weak | 1 |
| 6 | Rain | Cool | Normal | Strong | 0 |
| 7 | Overcast | Cool | Normal | Strong | 1 |
| 8 | Sunny | Mild | High | Weak | 0 |
| 9 | Sunny | Cool | Normal | Weak | 1 |
| 10 | Rain | Mild | Normal | Weak | 1 |
| 11 | Sunny | Mild | Normal | Strong | 1 |
| 12 | Overcast | Mild | High | Strong | 1 |
| 13 | Overcast | Hot | Normal | Weak | 1 |
| 14 | Rain | Mild | High | Strong | 0 |
# Common imports
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.tree import export_graphviz
from sklearn.preprocessing import StandardScaler, OneHotEncoder
from sklearn.compose import ColumnTransformer
from IPython.display import Image
from pydot import graph_from_dot_data
import os
# Where to save the figures and data files
PROJECT_ROOT_DIR = "Results"
FIGURE_ID = "Results/FigureFiles"
DATA_ID = "DataFiles/"
if not os.path.exists(PROJECT_ROOT_DIR):
os.mkdir(PROJECT_ROOT_DIR)
if not os.path.exists(FIGURE_ID):
os.makedirs(FIGURE_ID)
if not os.path.exists(DATA_ID):
os.makedirs(DATA_ID)
def image_path(fig_id):
return os.path.join(FIGURE_ID, fig_id)
def data_path(dat_id):
return os.path.join(DATA_ID, dat_id)
def save_fig(fig_id):
plt.savefig(image_path(fig_id) + ".png", format='png')
infile = open(data_path("rideclass.csv"),'r')
# Read the experimental data with Pandas
from IPython.display import display
ridedata = pd.read_csv(infile,names = ('Outlook','Temperature','Humidity','Wind','Ride'))
ridedata = pd.DataFrame(ridedata)
# Features and targets
X = ridedata.loc[:, ridedata.columns != 'Ride'].values
y = ridedata.loc[:, ridedata.columns == 'Ride'].values
# Create the encoder.
encoder = OneHotEncoder(handle_unknown="ignore")
# Assume for simplicity all features are categorical.
encoder.fit(X)
# Apply the encoder.
X = encoder.transform(X)
print(X)
# Then do a Classification tree
tree_clf = DecisionTreeClassifier(max_depth=2)
tree_clf.fit(X, y)
print("Train set accuracy with Decision Tree: {:.2f}".format(tree_clf.score(X,y)))
#transfer to a decision tree graph
export_graphviz(
tree_clf,
out_file="DataFiles/ride.dot",
rounded=True,
filled=True
)
cmd = 'dot -Tpng DataFiles/cancer.dot -o DataFiles/cancer.png'
os.system(cmd)
The above functions (gini, entropy and misclassification error) are important components of the so-called CART algorithm. We will discuss this algorithm below after we have discussed the information gain algorithm ID3.
In the example here we have converted all our attributes into numerical values \( 0,1,2 \) etc.
# Split a dataset based on an attribute and an attribute value
def test_split(index, value, dataset):
left, right = list(), list()
for row in dataset:
if row[index] < value:
left.append(row)
else:
right.append(row)
return left, right
# Calculate the Gini index for a split dataset
def gini_index(groups, classes):
# count all samples at split point
n_instances = float(sum([len(group) for group in groups]))
# sum weighted Gini index for each group
gini = 0.0
for group in groups:
size = float(len(group))
# avoid divide by zero
if size == 0:
continue
score = 0.0
# score the group based on the score for each class
for class_val in classes:
p = [row[-1] for row in group].count(class_val) / size
score += p * p
# weight the group score by its relative size
gini += (1.0 - score) * (size / n_instances)
return gini
# Select the best split point for a dataset
def get_split(dataset):
class_values = list(set(row[-1] for row in dataset))
b_index, b_value, b_score, b_groups = 999, 999, 999, None
for index in range(len(dataset[0])-1):
for row in dataset:
groups = test_split(index, row[index], dataset)
gini = gini_index(groups, class_values)
print('X%d < %.3f Gini=%.3f' % ((index+1), row[index], gini))
if gini < b_score:
b_index, b_value, b_score, b_groups = index, row[index], gini, groups
return {'index':b_index, 'value':b_value, 'groups':b_groups}
dataset = [[0,0,0,0,0],
[0,0,0,1,1],
[1,0,0,0,1],
[2,1,0,0,1],
[2,2,1,0,1],
[2,2,1,1,0],
[1,2,1,1,1],
[0,1,0,0,0],
[0,2,1,0,1],
[2,1,1,0,1],
[0,1,1,1,1],
[1,1,0,1,1],
[1,0,1,0,1],
[2,1,0,1,0]]
split = get_split(dataset)
print('Split: [X%d < %.3f]' % ((split['index']+1), split['value']))
The ID3 algorithm learns decision trees by constructing them in a top down way, beginning with the question which attribute should be tested at the root of the tree?
The ID3 algorithm selects which attribute to test at each node in the tree.
We would like to select the attribute that is most useful for classifying examples.
What is a good quantitative measure of the worth of an attribute?
Information gain measures how well a given attribute separates the training examples according to their target classification.
The ID3 algorithm uses this information gain measure to select among the candidate attributes at each step while growing the tree.
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import numpy as np
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.datasets import load_breast_cancer
from sklearn.svm import SVC
from sklearn.linear_model import LogisticRegression
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier
# Load the data
cancer = load_breast_cancer()
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(cancer.data,cancer.target,random_state=0)
print(X_train.shape)
print(X_test.shape)
# Logistic Regression
logreg = LogisticRegression(solver='lbfgs')
logreg.fit(X_train, y_train)
print("Test set accuracy with Logistic Regression: {:.2f}".format(logreg.score(X_test,y_test)))
# Support vector machine
svm = SVC(gamma='auto', C=100)
svm.fit(X_train, y_train)
print("Test set accuracy with SVM: {:.2f}".format(svm.score(X_test,y_test)))
# Decision Trees
deep_tree_clf = DecisionTreeClassifier(max_depth=None)
deep_tree_clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
print("Test set accuracy with Decision Trees: {:.2f}".format(deep_tree_clf.score(X_test,y_test)))
#now scale the data
from sklearn.preprocessing import StandardScaler
scaler = StandardScaler()
scaler.fit(X_train)
X_train_scaled = scaler.transform(X_train)
X_test_scaled = scaler.transform(X_test)
# Logistic Regression
logreg.fit(X_train_scaled, y_train)
print("Test set accuracy Logistic Regression with scaled data: {:.2f}".format(logreg.score(X_test_scaled,y_test)))
# Support Vector Machine
svm.fit(X_train_scaled, y_train)
print("Test set accuracy SVM with scaled data: {:.2f}".format(logreg.score(X_test_scaled,y_test)))
# Decision Trees
deep_tree_clf.fit(X_train_scaled, y_train)
print("Test set accuracy with Decision Trees and scaled data: {:.2f}".format(deep_tree_clf.score(X_test_scaled,y_test)))
from __future__ import division, print_function, unicode_literals
# Common imports
import numpy as np
import os
# to make this notebook's output stable across runs
np.random.seed(42)
# To plot pretty figures
import matplotlib
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from matplotlib.colors import ListedColormap
plt.rcParams['axes.labelsize'] = 14
plt.rcParams['xtick.labelsize'] = 12
plt.rcParams['ytick.labelsize'] = 12
from sklearn.svm import SVC
from sklearn import datasets
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier
from sklearn.datasets import make_moons
from sklearn.tree import export_graphviz
Xm, ym = make_moons(n_samples=100, noise=0.25, random_state=53)
deep_tree_clf1 = DecisionTreeClassifier(random_state=42)
deep_tree_clf2 = DecisionTreeClassifier(min_samples_leaf=4, random_state=42)
deep_tree_clf1.fit(Xm, ym)
deep_tree_clf2.fit(Xm, ym)
def plot_decision_boundary(clf, X, y, axes=[0, 7.5, 0, 3], iris=True, legend=False, plot_training=True):
x1s = np.linspace(axes[0], axes[1], 100)
x2s = np.linspace(axes[2], axes[3], 100)
x1, x2 = np.meshgrid(x1s, x2s)
X_new = np.c_[x1.ravel(), x2.ravel()]
y_pred = clf.predict(X_new).reshape(x1.shape)
custom_cmap = ListedColormap(['#fafab0','#9898ff','#a0faa0'])
plt.contourf(x1, x2, y_pred, alpha=0.3, cmap=custom_cmap)
if not iris:
custom_cmap2 = ListedColormap(['#7d7d58','#4c4c7f','#507d50'])
plt.contour(x1, x2, y_pred, cmap=custom_cmap2, alpha=0.8)
if plot_training:
plt.plot(X[:, 0][y==0], X[:, 1][y==0], "yo", label="Iris-Setosa")
plt.plot(X[:, 0][y==1], X[:, 1][y==1], "bs", label="Iris-Versicolor")
plt.plot(X[:, 0][y==2], X[:, 1][y==2], "g^", label="Iris-Virginica")
plt.axis(axes)
if iris:
plt.xlabel("Petal length", fontsize=14)
plt.ylabel("Petal width", fontsize=14)
else:
plt.xlabel(r"$x_1$", fontsize=18)
plt.ylabel(r"$x_2$", fontsize=18, rotation=0)
if legend:
plt.legend(loc="lower right", fontsize=14)
plt.figure(figsize=(11, 4))
plt.subplot(121)
plot_decision_boundary(deep_tree_clf1, Xm, ym, axes=[-1.5, 2.5, -1, 1.5], iris=False)
plt.title("No restrictions", fontsize=16)
plt.subplot(122)
plot_decision_boundary(deep_tree_clf2, Xm, ym, axes=[-1.5, 2.5, -1, 1.5], iris=False)
plt.title("min_samples_leaf = {}".format(deep_tree_clf2.min_samples_leaf), fontsize=14)
plt.show()
np.random.seed(6)
Xs = np.random.rand(100, 2) - 0.5
ys = (Xs[:, 0] > 0).astype(np.float32) * 2
angle = np.pi/4
rotation_matrix = np.array([[np.cos(angle), -np.sin(angle)], [np.sin(angle), np.cos(angle)]])
Xsr = Xs.dot(rotation_matrix)
tree_clf_s = DecisionTreeClassifier(random_state=42)
tree_clf_s.fit(Xs, ys)
tree_clf_sr = DecisionTreeClassifier(random_state=42)
tree_clf_sr.fit(Xsr, ys)
plt.figure(figsize=(11, 4))
plt.subplot(121)
plot_decision_boundary(tree_clf_s, Xs, ys, axes=[-0.7, 0.7, -0.7, 0.7], iris=False)
plt.subplot(122)
plot_decision_boundary(tree_clf_sr, Xsr, ys, axes=[-0.7, 0.7, -0.7, 0.7], iris=False)
plt.show()
# Quadratic training set + noise
np.random.seed(42)
m = 200
X = np.random.rand(m, 1)
y = 4 * (X - 0.5) ** 2
y = y + np.random.randn(m, 1) / 10
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeRegressor
tree_reg = DecisionTreeRegressor(max_depth=2, random_state=42)
tree_reg.fit(X, y)
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeRegressor
tree_reg1 = DecisionTreeRegressor(random_state=42, max_depth=2)
tree_reg2 = DecisionTreeRegressor(random_state=42, max_depth=3)
tree_reg1.fit(X, y)
tree_reg2.fit(X, y)
def plot_regression_predictions(tree_reg, X, y, axes=[0, 1, -0.2, 1], ylabel="$y$"):
x1 = np.linspace(axes[0], axes[1], 500).reshape(-1, 1)
y_pred = tree_reg.predict(x1)
plt.axis(axes)
plt.xlabel("$x_1$", fontsize=18)
if ylabel:
plt.ylabel(ylabel, fontsize=18, rotation=0)
plt.plot(X, y, "b.")
plt.plot(x1, y_pred, "r.-", linewidth=2, label=r"$\hat{y}$")
plt.figure(figsize=(11, 4))
plt.subplot(121)
plot_regression_predictions(tree_reg1, X, y)
for split, style in ((0.1973, "k-"), (0.0917, "k--"), (0.7718, "k--")):
plt.plot([split, split], [-0.2, 1], style, linewidth=2)
plt.text(0.21, 0.65, "Depth=0", fontsize=15)
plt.text(0.01, 0.2, "Depth=1", fontsize=13)
plt.text(0.65, 0.8, "Depth=1", fontsize=13)
plt.legend(loc="upper center", fontsize=18)
plt.title("max_depth=2", fontsize=14)
plt.subplot(122)
plot_regression_predictions(tree_reg2, X, y, ylabel=None)
for split, style in ((0.1973, "k-"), (0.0917, "k--"), (0.7718, "k--")):
plt.plot([split, split], [-0.2, 1], style, linewidth=2)
for split in (0.0458, 0.1298, 0.2873, 0.9040):
plt.plot([split, split], [-0.2, 1], "k:", linewidth=1)
plt.text(0.3, 0.5, "Depth=2", fontsize=13)
plt.title("max_depth=3", fontsize=14)
plt.show()
tree_reg1 = DecisionTreeRegressor(random_state=42)
tree_reg2 = DecisionTreeRegressor(random_state=42, min_samples_leaf=10)
tree_reg1.fit(X, y)
tree_reg2.fit(X, y)
x1 = np.linspace(0, 1, 500).reshape(-1, 1)
y_pred1 = tree_reg1.predict(x1)
y_pred2 = tree_reg2.predict(x1)
plt.figure(figsize=(11, 4))
plt.subplot(121)
plt.plot(X, y, "b.")
plt.plot(x1, y_pred1, "r.-", linewidth=2, label=r"$\hat{y}$")
plt.axis([0, 1, -0.2, 1.1])
plt.xlabel("$x_1$", fontsize=18)
plt.ylabel("$y$", fontsize=18, rotation=0)
plt.legend(loc="upper center", fontsize=18)
plt.title("No restrictions", fontsize=14)
plt.subplot(122)
plt.plot(X, y, "b.")
plt.plot(x1, y_pred2, "r.-", linewidth=2, label=r"$\hat{y}$")
plt.axis([0, 1, -0.2, 1.1])
plt.xlabel("$x_1$", fontsize=18)
plt.title("min_samples_leaf={}".format(tree_reg2.min_samples_leaf), fontsize=14)
plt.show()
However, by aggregating many decision trees, using methods like bagging, random forests, and boosting, the predictive performance of trees can be substantially improved.
As stated above and seen in many of the examples discussed here about a single decision tree, we often end up overfitting our training data. This normally means that we have a high variance. Can we reduce the variance of a statistical learning method?
This leads us to a set of different methods that can combine different machine learning algorithms or just use one of them to construct forests and jungles of trees, homogeneous ones or heterogenous ones. These methods are recognized by different names which we will try to explain here. These are
We discuss these methods here.

The plain decision trees suffer from high variance. This means that if we split the training data into two parts at random, and fit a decision tree to both halves, the results that we get could be quite different. In contrast, a procedure with low variance will yield similar results if applied repeatedly to distinct data sets; linear regression tends to have low variance, if the ratio of \( n \) to \( p \) is moderately large.
Bootstrap aggregation, or just bagging, is a general-purpose procedure for reducing the variance of a statistical learning method.
Bagging typically results in improved accuracy over prediction using a single tree. Unfortunately, however, it can be difficult to interpret the resulting model. Recall that one of the advantages of decision trees is the attractive and easily interpreted diagram that results.
However, when we bag a large number of trees, it is no longer possible to represent the resulting statistical learning procedure using a single tree, and it is no longer clear which variables are most important to the procedure. Thus, bagging improves prediction accuracy at the expense of interpretability. Although the collection of bagged trees is much more difficult to interpret than a single tree, one can obtain an overall summary of the importance of each predictor using the MSE (for bagging regression trees) or the Gini index (for bagging classification trees). In the case of bagging regression trees, we can record the total amount that the MSE is decreased due to splits over a given predictor, averaged over all \( B \) possible trees. A large value indicates an important predictor. Similarly, in the context of bagging classification trees, we can add up the total amount that the Gini index is decreased by splits over a given predictor, averaged over all \( B \) trees.
heads_proba = 0.51
coin_tosses = (np.random.rand(10000, 10) < heads_proba).astype(np.int32)
cumulative_heads_ratio = np.cumsum(coin_tosses, axis=0) / np.arange(1, 10001).reshape(-1, 1)
plt.figure(figsize=(8,3.5))
plt.plot(cumulative_heads_ratio)
plt.plot([0, 10000], [0.51, 0.51], "k--", linewidth=2, label="51%")
plt.plot([0, 10000], [0.5, 0.5], "k-", label="50%")
plt.xlabel("Number of coin tosses")
plt.ylabel("Heads ratio")
plt.legend(loc="lower right")
plt.axis([0, 10000, 0.42, 0.58])
save_fig("votingsimple")
plt.show()
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.datasets import make_moons
X, y = make_moons(n_samples=500, noise=0.30, random_state=42)
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, random_state=42)
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestClassifier
from sklearn.ensemble import VotingClassifier
from sklearn.linear_model import LogisticRegression
from sklearn.svm import SVC
log_clf = LogisticRegression(solver="liblinear", random_state=42)
rnd_clf = RandomForestClassifier(n_estimators=10, random_state=42)
svm_clf = SVC(gamma="auto", random_state=42)
voting_clf = VotingClassifier(
estimators=[('lr', log_clf), ('rf', rnd_clf), ('svc', svm_clf)],
voting='hard')
voting_clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score
for clf in (log_clf, rnd_clf, svm_clf, voting_clf):
clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
y_pred = clf.predict(X_test)
print(clf.__class__.__name__, accuracy_score(y_test, y_pred))
log_clf = LogisticRegression(solver="liblinear", random_state=42)
rnd_clf = RandomForestClassifier(n_estimators=10, random_state=42)
svm_clf = SVC(gamma="auto", probability=True, random_state=42)
voting_clf = VotingClassifier(
estimators=[('lr', log_clf), ('rf', rnd_clf), ('svc', svm_clf)],
voting='soft')
voting_clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score
for clf in (log_clf, rnd_clf, svm_clf, voting_clf):
clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
y_pred = clf.predict(X_test)
print(clf.__class__.__name__, accuracy_score(y_test, y_pred))
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.datasets import make_moons
X, y = make_moons(n_samples=500, noise=0.30, random_state=42)
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, random_state=42)
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestClassifier
from sklearn.ensemble import VotingClassifier
from sklearn.linear_model import LogisticRegression
from sklearn.svm import SVC
log_clf = LogisticRegression(random_state=42)
rnd_clf = RandomForestClassifier(random_state=42)
svm_clf = SVC(random_state=42)
voting_clf = VotingClassifier(
estimators=[('lr', log_clf), ('rf', rnd_clf), ('svc', svm_clf)],
voting='hard')
voting_clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score
for clf in (log_clf, rnd_clf, svm_clf, voting_clf):
clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
y_pred = clf.predict(X_test)
print(clf.__class__.__name__, accuracy_score(y_test, y_pred))
log_clf = LogisticRegression(random_state=42)
rnd_clf = RandomForestClassifier(random_state=42)
svm_clf = SVC(probability=True, random_state=42)
voting_clf = VotingClassifier(
estimators=[('lr', log_clf), ('rf', rnd_clf), ('svc', svm_clf)],
voting='soft')
voting_clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score
for clf in (log_clf, rnd_clf, svm_clf, voting_clf):
clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
y_pred = clf.predict(X_test)
print(clf.__class__.__name__, accuracy_score(y_test, y_pred))
from sklearn.ensemble import BaggingClassifier
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeClassifier
bag_clf = BaggingClassifier(
DecisionTreeClassifier(random_state=42), n_estimators=500,
max_samples=100, bootstrap=True, n_jobs=-1, random_state=42)
bag_clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
y_pred = bag_clf.predict(X_test)
from sklearn.metrics import accuracy_score
print(accuracy_score(y_test, y_pred))
tree_clf = DecisionTreeClassifier(random_state=42)
tree_clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
y_pred_tree = tree_clf.predict(X_test)
print(accuracy_score(y_test, y_pred_tree))
from matplotlib.colors import ListedColormap
def plot_decision_boundary(clf, X, y, axes=[-1.5, 2.5, -1, 1.5], alpha=0.5, contour=True):
x1s = np.linspace(axes[0], axes[1], 100)
x2s = np.linspace(axes[2], axes[3], 100)
x1, x2 = np.meshgrid(x1s, x2s)
X_new = np.c_[x1.ravel(), x2.ravel()]
y_pred = clf.predict(X_new).reshape(x1.shape)
custom_cmap = ListedColormap(['#fafab0','#9898ff','#a0faa0'])
plt.contourf(x1, x2, y_pred, alpha=0.3, cmap=custom_cmap)
if contour:
custom_cmap2 = ListedColormap(['#7d7d58','#4c4c7f','#507d50'])
plt.contour(x1, x2, y_pred, cmap=custom_cmap2, alpha=0.8)
plt.plot(X[:, 0][y==0], X[:, 1][y==0], "yo", alpha=alpha)
plt.plot(X[:, 0][y==1], X[:, 1][y==1], "bs", alpha=alpha)
plt.axis(axes)
plt.xlabel(r"$x_1$", fontsize=18)
plt.ylabel(r"$x_2$", fontsize=18, rotation=0)
plt.figure(figsize=(11,4))
plt.subplot(121)
plot_decision_boundary(tree_clf, X, y)
plt.title("Decision Tree", fontsize=14)
plt.subplot(122)
plot_decision_boundary(bag_clf, X, y)
plt.title("Decision Trees with Bagging", fontsize=14)
save_fig("baggingtree")
plt.show()
Let us bring up our good old boostrap example from the linear regression lectures. We change the linerar regression algorithm with a decision tree wth different depths and perform a bootstrap aggregate (in this case we perform as many bootstraps as data points \( n \)).
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import numpy as np
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.pipeline import make_pipeline
from sklearn.utils import resample
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeRegressor
n = 100
n_boostraps = 100
maxdepth = 8
# Make data set.
x = np.linspace(-3, 3, n).reshape(-1, 1)
y = np.exp(-x**2) + 1.5 * np.exp(-(x-2)**2)+ np.random.normal(0, 0.1, x.shape)
error = np.zeros(maxdepth)
bias = np.zeros(maxdepth)
variance = np.zeros(maxdepth)
polydegree = np.zeros(maxdepth)
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(x, y, test_size=0.2)
from sklearn.preprocessing import StandardScaler
scaler = StandardScaler()
scaler.fit(X_train)
X_train_scaled = scaler.transform(X_train)
X_test_scaled = scaler.transform(X_test)
# we produce a simple tree first as benchmark
simpletree = DecisionTreeRegressor(max_depth=3)
simpletree.fit(X_train_scaled, y_train)
simpleprediction = simpletree.predict(X_test_scaled)
for degree in range(1,maxdepth):
model = DecisionTreeRegressor(max_depth=degree)
y_pred = np.empty((y_test.shape[0], n_boostraps))
for i in range(n_boostraps):
x_, y_ = resample(X_train_scaled, y_train)
model.fit(x_, y_)
y_pred[:, i] = model.predict(X_test_scaled)#.ravel()
polydegree[degree] = degree
error[degree] = np.mean( np.mean((y_test - y_pred)**2, axis=1, keepdims=True) )
bias[degree] = np.mean( (y_test - np.mean(y_pred, axis=1, keepdims=True))**2 )
variance[degree] = np.mean( np.var(y_pred, axis=1, keepdims=True) )
print('Polynomial degree:', degree)
print('Error:', error[degree])
print('Bias^2:', bias[degree])
print('Var:', variance[degree])
print('{} >= {} + {} = {}'.format(error[degree], bias[degree], variance[degree], bias[degree]+variance[degree]))
mse_simpletree= np.mean( np.mean((y_test - simpleprediction)**2)
print(mse_simpletree)
plt.xlim(1,maxdepth)
plt.plot(polydegree, error, label='MSE')
plt.plot(polydegree, bias, label='bias')
plt.plot(polydegree, variance, label='Variance')
plt.legend()
save_fig("baggingboot")
plt.show()