DOCSLIB.ORG

An Introduction to Statistical Classification and Its Application To

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

An introduction to statistical classification and its application to Field Asymmetric Ion Mobility Spectrometry Brian Azizia, Georgios Pilikosb aDepartment of Economics, University of Cambridge, Sidgwick Avenue, Cambridge, CB3 9DD, United Kingdom bLaboratory for Scientific Computing, University of Cambridge, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge, CB3 0HE, United Kingdom Abstract This paper serves as an introduction to a particular area of Machine Learning, statistical classification, applied on medical data sets for automatic clinical diagnosis. An application of these models is illustrated in order to provide non-invasive diagnostics with the discovery of new gas volatile compounds (VOCs) that could provide the detection of fermentation profiles of patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). To achieve the above, an investigation of ten statistical classification algorithms from the supervised learning literature is undertaken. From this investigation, selected algorithms are applied on medical Field Asymmetric Ion Mobility Spectrometry (FAIMS) data sets to train classification models. From our results on the FAIMS data sets, we show that it is possible to classify unseen samples with a very high certainty and automatically perform medical diagnosis for Crohn’s disease and Ulcerative Colitis. In addition, we propose potential future research on other data sets by utilizing the results from the identification of informative regions in feature space. Keywords: Supervised Learning, Statistical Classification, Automatic Clinical Diagnosis, Feature Identification, Ion Mobility 1. Introduction data available in hospitals around the globe. The application of these models on FAIMS data sets By utilizing the emerging technologies and avail- is inspired by a long tradition of clinicians that have able data around us, AI is increasingly being used in been using their own sense of smell as a diagnostic tool. Medicine [1]. Development of algorithms that are able This traces even back to Hippocrates who suggested to process large amounts of data and produce valuable that a patient’s odour could lead to their clinical diag- information is necessary. In the medical world, where nosis. Thus, the motives of using these data sets is due decisions are of vital importance, utilization of medical to the recent research on non-invasive diagnostics and history data can greatly enhance diagnosis. That is, by the discovery of new gas volatile compounds (VOCs) collecting samples from positively diagnosed and neg- biomarkers [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] that could provide a de- atively diagnosed patients, it is possible to identify pat- tection of fermentation profiles of patients with IBD. terns or specific features that distinguish them for reli- The pathogenesis of IBD involves the role of bacteria able future decision-making. [4]. These bacteria ferment non-starch polysaccharides The scientific field that deals with this problem in the colon that produces a fermentation profile that can is called Machine Learning and a more relevant sub be traced in urine smell [4]. Using FAIMS instruments, field called statistical classification from the supervised it is possible to track the resultant VOCs that emanate learning literature. A model is trained by giving it a from urine and identify patterns in their chemical finger- number of examples, each belonging to a certain class. prints to automatically perform medical diagnosis for The aim is to use this model to accurately predict new, Crohn’s disease and Ulcerative Colitis. previously unseen examples. Doctors and practitioners In this paper, we provide a review of classification can benefit from this technology since models can find techniques and test some on medical FAIMS data sets. patterns and structure in the data that was previously From our results on the FAIMS data sets, we show that not possible. This can be achieved by the parallel in- it is possible to classify unseen samples with a very high telligent processing of huge amounts of medical history certainty on certain data sets and propose potential fu- ture research on other data sets that would potentially Its true class will be labelled by y∗ and our prediction of allow training for more accurate classification models. the class will bey ˆ∗. Specific informative regions that play a vital role for the creation of the models’ decision boundaries on the data 2.1. Linear Discriminant Analysis sets are also identified and illustrated which are worth Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) [7] aims to sep- investigating further. arate the classes in feature space using linear decision The paper is organized as follows. Firstly, in sec- surfaces (hyperplanes). tion 2, an in-depth overview of the theory behind the We need to make two slight modifications to our classification methods is given describing potential ad- notation. Firstly, we need to attach a dummy ‘input’ vantages and disadvantages during training and testing feature xi;0 = 1 to our input vectors xi so that xi = T phases along with a description of each algorithm’s im- [1 xi;1 xi;2 ::: xi;D] . Secondly, we will use an alterna- plementation. In section 3, testing of a subset of these tive representation of our classes: Instead of labels yi, th algorithms is described on numerous data sets to inves- we shall use target vectors ti of length K, where the c tigate their practical performance. In section 4, an in- component of ti is equal to 1 if training example i is in troduction to FAIMS technology is given along with the class c and 0 otherwise (i.e. ti;c = 1 if yi = c). application of selected algorithms on medical FAIMS data sets by testing various scenarios. Finally, a dis- Classification: For LDA, the discriminant function cussion about future research and final remarks can be takes the form found in sections 5 and 6 respectively. ∗ T ∗ yˆ = arg max(wc x ): (1) c 2. Methods That is, we predict x∗ to be in class c which maximizes T ∗ Fundamental definitions and notation: the expression wc x . wc is a (D + 1)-dimensional vector containing the Classification is a form of supervised machine learn- weight parameters of the model for class c. The bound- ing. We train a model by using a large number of exam- T T ary between class c and class d is given by wc x = wd x, ples, each belonging to a certain class. Our aim is to use so that (wd − wc) denotes the normal vector of the deci- the model to accurately predict new, previously unseen sion plane. examples. T ∗ There is a nice interpretation to the quantity wc x . We have K discrete classes, that we will index by We can treat it as an estimate of the probability that x∗ the letter c, i.e. c 2 f1; 2;:::; Kg. We have a train- belongs to class c, that is ing set containing N training examples. Each example ∗ T ∗ consists of two elements, namely the input vector (or p(y = c j wc; Data) = wc x : (2) feature vector), denoted by xi, and the corresponding label, denoted by yi. We will use the letter i to index the Training: The goal of the training phase is to learn training examples, so that i 2 f1; 2;:::; Ng. the weight parameters wc for each class c. We achieve Each label yi is an integer between 1 and K, indicating this by minimising an error function. The optimization the class of training example i. Each input vector xi is objectives are given by: a column vector containing the values of the features N of example i in its components. We let D be the total 1 X E(w ) = (wT x − t )2; c 2 f1;:::; Kg: (3) number of features and use j 2 f1; 2 :::; Dg to index c 2 c i i;c i=1 the features of our input vectors, so that xi; j denotes the jth feature of the ith training example. This is called the least squares error function, and we T We let X = [x1 x2 ::: xN] stand for the N × D ma- minimize one per class. It is the sum of squares of the trix containing the training examples in its rows and prediction errors resulting from a particular choice of the input features in its columns. We will also use weight vector wc. We aim to find wc for which this is T y = [y1 y2 ::: yN ] to denote the N-dimensional column the smallest. th vector containing the class of the i training example in Differentiating with respect to wc we find that the op- row i. timal weight vector satisfies Finally, when discussing how to make new predic- N ∗ @E(w ) X tions based on the trained model, we will use x to de- c = (w T x − t )x = 0: (4) @w c i i;c i note the feature vector of a previously unseen example. c i=1 2 T This problem has in fact a closed form solution, and Computing the quantities wc xi can be interpreted as we can state it concisely using matrices. To do that, a form of dimensionality reduction. We take high di- let W = [w1 w2 ::: wK] be the matrix containing the mensional feature vectors xi and project them onto one weight vectors for all the classes in its columns and let dimension (i.e. onto a line). T T = [t1 t2 ::: tN ] be the matrix containing all the target Generally, dimensionality reduction leads to a con- vectors in its rows. siderable loss of information. However, we can adjust The solution to LDA can then be written as w to find the line that minimizes the overlap between T −1 T the classes when projecting them onto it. W = (X X) X T: (5) The goal of FDA is to do just that by maximising The most expensive part in the computation is invert- the Fisher Criterion, which is defined below.
Recommended publications
  • On Discriminative Bayesian Network Classifiers and Logistic Regression

    On Discriminative Bayesian Network Classifiers and Logistic Regression

    On Discriminative Bayesian Network Classifiers and Logistic Regression Teemu Roos and Hannes Wettig Complex Systems Computation Group, Helsinki Institute for Information Technology, P.O. Box 9800, FI-02015 HUT, Finland Peter Gr¨unwald Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica, P.O. Box 94079, NL-1090 GB Amsterdam, The Netherlands Petri Myllym¨aki and Henry Tirri Complex Systems Computation Group, Helsinki Institute for Information Technology, P.O. Box 9800, FI-02015 HUT, Finland Abstract. Discriminative learning of the parameters in the naive Bayes model is known to be equivalent to a logistic regression problem. Here we show that the same fact holds for much more general Bayesian network models, as long as the corresponding network structure satisfies a certain graph-theoretic property. The property holds for naive Bayes but also for more complex structures such as tree-augmented naive Bayes (TAN) as well as for mixed diagnostic-discriminative structures. Our results imply that for networks satisfying our property, the condi- tional likelihood cannot have local maxima so that the global maximum can be found by simple local optimization methods. We also show that if this property does not hold, then in general the conditional likelihood can have local, non-global maxima. We illustrate our theoretical results by empirical experiments with local optimization in a conditional naive Bayes model. Furthermore, we provide a heuristic strategy for pruning the number of parameters and relevant features in such models. For many data sets, we obtain good results with heavily pruned submodels containing many fewer parameters than the original naive Bayes model. Keywords: Bayesian classifiers, Bayesian networks, discriminative learning, logistic regression 1.
  • Lecture 5: Naive Bayes Classifier 1 Introduction

    Lecture 5: Naive Bayes Classifier 1 Introduction

    CSE517A Machine Learning Spring 2020 Lecture 5: Naive Bayes Classifier Instructor: Marion Neumann Scribe: Jingyu Xin Reading: fcml 5.2.1 (Bayes Classifier, Naive Bayes, Classifying Text, and Smoothing) Application Sentiment analysis aims at discovering people's opinions, emo- tions, feelings about a subject matter, product, or service from text. Take some time to answer the following warm-up questions: (1) Is this a regression or classification problem? (2) What are the features and how would you represent them? (3) What is the prediction task? (4) How well do you think a linear model will perform? 1 Introduction Thought: Can we model p(y j x) without model assumptions, e.g. Gaussian/Bernoulli distribution etc.? Idea: Estimate p(y j x) from the data directly, then use the Bayes classifier. Let y be discrete, Pn i=1 I(xi = x \ yi = y) p(y j x) = Pn (1) i=1 I(xi = x) where the numerator counts all examples with input x that have label y and the denominator counts all examples with input x. Figure 1: Illustration of estimatingp ^(y j x) From Figure ??, it is clear that, using the MLE method, we can estimatep ^(y j x) as jCj p^(y j x) = (2) jBj But there is a big problem with this method: The MLE estimate is only good if there are many training vectors with the same identical features as x. 1 2 This never happens for high-dimensional or continuous feature spaces. Solution: Bayes Rule. p(x j y) p(y) p(y j x) = (3) p(x) Let's estimate p(x j y) and p(y) instead! 2 Naive Bayes We have a discrete label space C that can either be binary f+1; −1g or multi-class f1; :::; Kg.
  • Hybrid of Naive Bayes and Gaussian Naive Bayes for Classification: a Map Reduce Approach

    Hybrid of Naive Bayes and Gaussian Naive Bayes for Classification: a Map Reduce Approach

    International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE) ISSN: 2278-3075, Volume-8, Issue-6S3, April 2019 Hybrid of Naive Bayes and Gaussian Naive Bayes for Classification: A Map Reduce Approach Shikha Agarwal, Balmukumd Jha, Tisu Kumar, Manish Kumar, Prabhat Ranjan Abstract: Naive Bayes classifier is well known machine model could be used without accepting Bayesian probability learning algorithm which has shown virtues in many fields. In or using any Bayesian methods. Despite their naive design this work big data analysis platforms like Hadoop distributed and simple assumptions, Naive Bayes classifiers have computing and map reduce programming is used with Naive worked quite well in many complex situations. An analysis Bayes and Gaussian Naive Bayes for classification. Naive Bayes is manily popular for classification of discrete data sets while of the Bayesian classification problem showed that there are Gaussian is used to classify data that has continuous attributes. sound theoretical reasons behind the apparently implausible Experimental results show that Hybrid of Naive Bayes and efficacy of types of classifiers[5]. A comprehensive Gaussian Naive Bayes MapReduce model shows the better comparison with other classification algorithms in 2006 performance in terms of classification accuracy on adult data set showed that Bayes classification is outperformed by other which has many continuous attributes. approaches, such as boosted trees or random forests [6]. An Index Terms: Naive Bayes, Gaussian Naive Bayes, Map Reduce, Classification. advantage of Naive Bayes is that it only requires a small number of training data to estimate the parameters necessary I. INTRODUCTION for classification. The fundamental property of Naive Bayes is that it works on discrete value.
  • Locally Differentially Private Naive Bayes Classification

    Locally Differentially Private Naive Bayes Classification

    Locally Differentially Private Naive Bayes Classification EMRE YILMAZ, Case Western Reserve University MOHAMMAD AL-RUBAIE, University of South Florida J. MORRIS CHANG, University of South Florida In machine learning, classification models need to be trained in order to predict class labels. When the training data contains personal information about individuals, collecting training data becomes difficult due to privacy concerns. Local differential privacy isa definition to measure the individual privacy when there is no trusted data curator. Individuals interact with an untrusteddata aggregator who obtains statistical information about the population without learning personal data. In order to train a Naive Bayes classifier in an untrusted setting, we propose to use methods satisfying local differential privacy. Individuals send theirperturbed inputs that keep the relationship between the feature values and class labels. The data aggregator estimates all probabilities needed by the Naive Bayes classifier. Then, new instances can be classified based on the estimated probabilities. We propose solutions forboth discrete and continuous data. In order to eliminate high amount of noise and decrease communication cost in multi-dimensional data, we propose utilizing dimensionality reduction techniques which can be applied by individuals before perturbing their inputs. Our experimental results show that the accuracy of the Naive Bayes classifier is maintained even when the individual privacy is guaranteed under local differential privacy, and that using dimensionality reduction enhances the accuracy. CCS Concepts: • Security and privacy → Privacy-preserving protocols; • Computing methodologies → Supervised learning by classification; Dimensionality reduction and manifold learning. Additional Key Words and Phrases: Local Differential Privacy, Naive Bayes, Classification, Dimensionality Reduction 1 INTRODUCTION Predictive analytics is the process of making prediction about future events by analyzing the current data using statistical techniques.
  • Improving Feature Selection Algorithms Using Normalised Feature Histograms

    Improving Feature Selection Algorithms Using Normalised Feature Histograms

    Page 1 of 10 Improving feature selection algorithms using normalised feature histograms A. P. James and A. K. Maan The proposed feature selection method builds a histogram of the most stable features from random subsets of training set and ranks the features based on a classifier based cross validation. This approach reduces the instability of features obtained by conventional feature selection methods that occur with variation in training data and selection criteria. Classification results on 4 microarray and 3 image datasets using 3 major feature selection criteria and a naive bayes classifier show considerable improvement over benchmark results. Introduction : Relevance of features selected by conventional feature selection method is tightly coupled with the notion of inter-feature redundancy within the patterns [1-3]. This essentially results in design of data-driven methods that are designed for meeting criteria of redundancy using various measures of inter-feature correlations [4-5]. These measures behave differently to different types of data, and to different levels of natural variability. This introduces instability in selection of features with change in number of samples in the training set and quality of features from one database to another. The use of large number of statistically distinct training samples can increase the quality of the selected features, although it can be practically unrealistic due to increase in computational complexity and unavailability of sufficient training samples. As an example, in realistic high dimensional databases such as gene expression databases of a rare cancer, there is a practical limitation on availability of large number of training samples. In such cases, instability that occurs with selecting features from insufficient training data would lead to a wrong conclusion that genes responsible for a cancer be strongly subject dependent and not general for a cancer.
  • Naïve Bayes Lecture 17

    Naïve Bayes Lecture 17

    Naïve Bayes Lecture 17 David Sontag New York University Slides adapted from Luke Zettlemoyer, Carlos Guestrin, Dan Klein, and Mehryar Mohri Brief ArticleBrief Article The Author The Author January 11, 2012January 11, 2012 θˆ =argmax ln P ( θ) θˆ =argmax ln P ( θ) θ D| θ D| ln θαH ln θαH d d d ln P ( θ)= [ln θαH (1 θ)αT ] = [α ln θ + α ln(1 θ)] d d dθ D| dθ d − dθ H T − ln P ( θ)= [ln θαH (1 θ)αT ] = [α ln θ + α ln(1 θ)] dθ D| dθ − dθ H T − d d αH αT = αH ln θ + αT ln(1 θ)= =0 d d dθ αH dθ αT− θ − 1 θ = αH ln θ + αT ln(1 θ)= =0 − dθ dθ − θ −2N12 θ δ 2e− − P (mistake) ≥ ≥ 2N2 δ 2e− P (mistake) ≥ ≥ ln δ ln 2 2N2 Bayesian Learning ≥ − Prior • Use Bayes’ rule! 2 Data Likelihood ln δ ln 2 2N ln(2/δ) ≥ − N ≥ 22 Posterior ln(2/δ) N ln(2/0.05) 3.8 ≥ 22N Normalization= 190 ≥ 2 0.12 ≈ 0.02 × ln(2• /Or0. equivalently:05) 3.8 N • For uniform priors, this= 190 reducesP (θ) to 1 ≥ 2 0.12 ≈ 0.02 ∝ ×maximum likelihood estimation! P (θ) 1 P (θ ) P ( θ) ∝ |D ∝ D| 1 1 Brief ArticleBrief Article Brief Article Brief Article The Author The Author The Author January 11, 2012 JanuaryThe Author 11, 2012 January 11, 2012 January 11, 2012 θˆ =argmax ln Pθˆ( =argmaxθ) ln P ( θ) θ D| θ D| ˆ =argmax ln (θˆ =argmax) ln P ( θ) θ P θ θ θ D| αH D| ln θαH ln θ αH ln θαH ln θ d d α α d d d lnαP ( θ)=α [lndθ H (1 θ) T ] = [α ln θ + α ln(1 θ)] ln P ( θ)= [lndθ H (1 θ) T ]d= [α ln θ + α ln(1d Hθ)] T d d dθ D| dθ d αH H − αT T dθ − dθ D| dθ αlnH P ( − θα)=T [lndθθ (1 θ) ] = [α−H ln θ + αT ln(1 θ)] ln P ( θ)= [lndθθ (1 D|θ) ] =dθ [αH ln θ−+ αT ln(1dθ θ)] − dθ D| dθ − d dθ d −α
  • Last Time Today Bayesian Learning Naïve Bayes the Distributions We

    Last Time Today Bayesian Learning Naïve Bayes the Distributions We

    Last Time CSE 446 • Learning Gaussians Gaussian Naïve Bayes & • Naïve Bayes Logistic Regression Winter 2012 Today • Gaussians Naïve Bayes Dan Weld • Logistic Regression Some slides from Carlos Guestrin, Luke Zettlemoyer 2 Text Classification Bayesian Learning Bag of Words Representation Prior aardvark 0 Use Bayes rule: Data Likelihood about 2 all 2 Africa 1 Posterior P(Y | X) = P(X |Y) P(Y) apple 0 P(X) anxious 0 ... Normalization gas 1 ... oil 1 Or equivalently: P(Y | X) P(X | Y) P(Y) … Zaire 0 Naïve Bayes The Distributions We Love Discrete Continuous • Naïve Bayes assumption: – Features are independent given class: Binary {0, 1} k Values Single Bernouilli Event – More generally: Sequence Binomial Multinomial (N trials) N= H+T • How many parameters now? • Suppose X is composed of n binary features Conjugate Beta Dirichlet Prior 6 1 NB with Bag of Words for Text Classification Easy to Implement • Learning phase: – Prior P(Ym) • But… • Count how many documents from topic m / total # docs – P(Xi|Ym) • Let Bm be a bag of words formed from all the docs in topic m • Let #(i, B) be the number of times word iis in bag B • If you do… it probably won’t work… • P(Xi | Ym) = (#(i, Bm)+1) / (W+j#(j, Bm)) where W=#unique words • Test phase: – For each document • Use naïve Bayes decision rule 8 Probabilities: Important Detail! Naïve Bayes Posterior Probabilities • Classification results of naïve Bayes • P(spam | X … X ) = P(spam | X ) 1 n i i – I.e. the class with maximum posterior probability… Any more potential problems here? – Usually fairly accurate (?!?!?) • However, due to the inadequacy of the .
  • Generalized Naive Bayes Classifiers

    Generalized Naive Bayes Classifiers

    Generalized Naive Bayes Classifiers Kim Larsen Concord, California [email protected] ABSTRACT This paper presents a generalization of the Naive Bayes Clas- sifier. The method is called the Generalized Naive Bayes This paper presents a generalization of the Naive Bayes Clas- Classifier (GNBC) and extends the NBC by relaxing the sifier. The method is specifically designed for binary clas- assumption of conditional independence between the pre- sification problems commonly found in credit scoring and dictors. This reduces the bias in the estimated class prob- marketing applications. The Generalized Naive Bayes Clas- abilities and improves the fit, while greatly enhancing the sifier turns out to be a powerful tool for both exploratory descriptive value of the model. The generalization is done in and predictive analysis. It can generate accurate predictions a fully non-parametric fashion without putting any restric- through a flexible, non-parametric fitting procedure, while tions on the relationship between the independent variables being able to uncover hidden patterns in the data. In this and the dependent variable. This makes the GNBC much paper, the Generalized Naive Bayes Classifier and the orig- more flexible than traditional linear and non-linear regres- inal Bayes Classifier will be demonstrated. Also, important sion, and allows it to uncover hidden patterns in the data. ties to logistic regression, the Generalized Additive Model Moreover, the GNBC retains the additive structure of the (GAM), and Weight Of Evidence will be discussed. NBC which means that it does not suffer from the prob- lems of dimensionality that are common with other non- 1. INTRODUCTION parametric techniques.
  • A Comparison of Three Different Methods for Classification of Breast

    A Comparison of Three Different Methods for Classification of Breast

    A Comparison of Three Different Methods for Classification of Breast Cancer Data Daniele Soria Jonathan M. Garibaldi Elia Biganzoli University of Nottingham National Cancer Institute of Milan School of Computer Science Unit of Medical Statistics and Biometry Jubilee Campus, Wollaton Road, Via Vanzetti 5, 20133 Milan, Italy Nottingham, NG8 1BB, UK [email protected] fdqs,[email protected] Ian O. Ellis University of Nottingham School of Molecular Medical Sciences Queens Medical Centre, Derby Road, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK [email protected] Abstract tumour information from the databases. Among the exist- ing techniques, supervised learning methods are the most The classification of breast cancer patients is of great popular in cancer diagnosis [8]. importance in cancer diagnosis. During the last few years, According to John and Langley [6], methods for in- many algorithms have been proposed for this task. In ducing probabilistic descriptions from training data have this paper, we review different supervised machine learn- emerged as a major alternative to more established ap- ing techniques for classification of a novel dataset and per- proaches to machine learning, such as decision-tree induc- form a methodological comparison of these. We used the tion and neural networks. However, some of the most im- C4.5 tree classifier, a Multilayer Perceptron and a naive pressive results to date have come from a much simpler – Bayes classifier over a large set of tumour markers. We and much older – approach to probabilistic induction known found good performance of the Multilayer Perceptron even as the naive Bayesian classifier. Despite the simplifying as- when we reduced the number of features to be classified.
  • Foundations of Bayesian Learning

    Foundations of Bayesian Learning

    Introduction Foundations of Bayesian Learning Davide Bacciu Computational Intelligence & Machine Learning Group Dipartimento di Informatica Università di Pisa [email protected] Introduzione all’Intelligenza Artificiale - A.A. 2012/2013 Introduction Lecture Outline 1 Introduction 2 Probability Theory Probabilities and Random Variables Bayes Theorem and Independence 3 Bayesian Inference Hypothesis Selection Candy Box Example 4 Parameters Learning 5 Naive Bayes Classifier The Model Learning Text Classification Example 6 Bayesian Networks Introduction Bayesian Learning Why Bayesian? Easy, because of frequent use of Bayes theorem... Bayesian Inference A powerful approach to probabilistic reasoning Bayesian Networks An expressive model for describing probabilistic relationships Why bothering? Real-world is uncertain Data (noisy measurements and partial knowledge) Beliefs (concepts and their relationships) Probability as a measure of our beliefs Conceptual framework for describing uncertainty in world representation Learning and reasoning become matters of probabilistic inference Probabilistic weighting of the hypothesis Probability Theory Part I Probability and Learning Probabilities and Random Variables Probability Theory Bayes Theorem and Independence Random Variables A Random Variable (RV) is a function describing the outcome of a random process by assigning unique values to all possible outcomes of the experiment Random Process =) Coin Toss 0 if heads Discrete RV =) X = 1 if tails The sample space S of a random process is the set of all possible outcomes, e.g. S = fheads; tailsg An event e is a subset e 2 S, i.e. a set of outcomes, that may occur or not as a result of the experiment Random variables are the building blocks for representing our world Probabilities and Random Variables Probability Theory Bayes Theorem and Independence Probability Functions A probability function P(X = x) 2 [0; 1] (P(x) in short) measures the probability of a RV X attaining the value x, i.e.
  • Bayesian Learning

    Bayesian Learning

    SC4/SM8 Advanced Topics in Statistical Machine Learning Bayesian Learning Dino Sejdinovic Department of Statistics Oxford Slides and other materials available at: http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~sejdinov/atsml/ Department of Statistics, Oxford SC4/SM8 ATSML, HT2018 1 / 14 Bayesian Learning Review of Bayesian Inference The Bayesian Learning Framework Bayesian learning: treat parameter vector θ as a random variable: process of learning is then computation of the posterior distribution p(θjD). In addition to the likelihood p(Djθ) need to specify a prior distribution p(θ). Posterior distribution is then given by the Bayes Theorem: p(Djθ)p(θ) p(θjD) = p(D) Likelihood: p(Djθ) Posterior: p(θjD) Prior: p(θ) Marginal likelihood: p(D) = Θ p(Djθ)p(θ)dθ ´ Summarizing the posterior: MAP Posterior mode: θb = argmaxθ2Θ p(θjD) (maximum a posteriori). mean Posterior mean: θb = E [θjD]. Posterior variance: Var[θjD]. Department of Statistics, Oxford SC4/SM8 ATSML, HT2018 2 / 14 Bayesian Learning Review of Bayesian Inference Bayesian Inference on the Categorical Distribution Suppose we observe the with yi 2 f1;:::; Kg, and model them as i.i.d. with pmf π = (π1; : : : ; πK): n K Y Y nk p(Djπ) = πyi = πk i=1 k=1 Pn PK with nk = i=1 1(yi = k) and πk > 0, k=1 πk = 1. The conjugate prior on π is the Dirichlet distribution Dir(α1; : : : ; αK) with parameters αk > 0, and density PK K Γ( αk) Y p(π) = k=1 παk−1 QK k k=1 Γ(αk) k=1 PK on the probability simplex fπ : πk > 0; k=1 πk = 1g.
  • Improving the Naive Bayes Classifier Via a Quick Variable Selection

    Improving the Naive Bayes Classifier Via a Quick Variable Selection

    Article Improving the Naive Bayes Classifier via a Quick Variable Selection Method Using Maximum of Entropy Joaquín Abellán * and Javier G. Castellano Department of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-958-242-376 Academic Editor: Dawn E. Holmes Received: 24 March 2017; Accepted: 19 May 2017; Published: 25 May 2017 Abstract: Variable selection methods play an important role in the field of attribute mining. The Naive Bayes (NB) classifier is a very simple and popular classification method that yields good results in a short processing time. Hence, it is a very appropriate classifier for very large datasets. The method has a high dependence on the relationships between the variables. The Info-Gain (IG) measure, which is based on general entropy, can be used as a quick variable selection method. This measure ranks the importance of the attribute variables on a variable under study via the information obtained from a dataset. The main drawback is that it is always non-negative and it requires setting the information threshold to select the set of most important variables for each dataset. We introduce here a new quick variable selection method that generalizes the method based on the Info-Gain measure. It uses imprecise probabilities and the maximum entropy measure to select the most informative variables without setting a threshold. This new variable selection method, combined with the Naive Bayes classifier, improves the original method and provides a valuable tool for handling datasets with a very large number of features and a huge amount of data, where more complex methods are not computationally feasible.