Q5. We have seen that we can fit an SVM with a non-linear kernel in order to perform classification using a non-linear decision boundary. We will now see that we can also obtain a non-linear decision boundary by performing logistic regression using non-linear transformations of the features.
set.seed(421)
x1 = runif(500) - 0.5
x2 = runif(500) - 0.5
y = 1 * (x1^2 - x2^2 > 0)
plot(x1[y == 0], x2[y == 0], col = "red", xlab = "X1", ylab = "X2", pch = "+")
points(x1[y == 1], x2[y == 1], col = "blue", pch = 4)
lm.fit = glm(y ~ x1 + x2, family = binomial)
summary(lm.fit)
##
## Call:
## glm(formula = y ~ x1 + x2, family = binomial)
##
## Deviance Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -1.278 -1.227 1.089 1.135 1.175
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
## (Intercept) 0.11999 0.08971 1.338 0.181
## x1 -0.16881 0.30854 -0.547 0.584
## x2 -0.08198 0.31476 -0.260 0.795
##
## (Dispersion parameter for binomial family taken to be 1)
##
## Null deviance: 691.35 on 499 degrees of freedom
## Residual deviance: 690.99 on 497 degrees of freedom
## AIC: 696.99
##
## Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 3
data = data.frame(x1 = x1, x2 = x2, y = y)
lm.prob = predict(lm.fit, data, type = "response")
lm.pred = ifelse(lm.prob > 0.52, 1, 0)
data.pos = data[lm.pred == 1, ]
data.neg = data[lm.pred == 0, ]
plot(data.pos$x1, data.pos$x2, col = "blue", xlab = "X1", ylab = "X2", pch = "+")
points(data.neg$x1, data.neg$x2, col = "red", pch = 4)
lm.fit = glm(y ~ poly(x1, 2) + poly(x2, 2) + I(x1 * x2), data = data, family = binomial)
## Warning: glm.fit: algorithm did not converge
## Warning: glm.fit: fitted probabilities numerically 0 or 1 occurred
lm.prob = predict(lm.fit, data, type = "response")
lm.pred = ifelse(lm.prob > 0.5, 1, 0)
data.pos = data[lm.pred == 1, ]
data.neg = data[lm.pred == 0, ]
plot(data.pos$x1, data.pos$x2, col = "blue", xlab = "X1", ylab = "X2", pch = "+")
points(data.neg$x1, data.neg$x2, col = "red", pch = 4)
library(e1071)
svm.fit = svm(as.factor(y) ~ x1 + x2, data, kernel = "linear", cost = 0.1)
svm.pred = predict(svm.fit, data)
data.pos = data[svm.pred == 1, ]
data.neg = data[svm.pred == 0, ]
plot(data.pos$x1, data.pos$x2, col = "blue", xlab = "X1", ylab = "X2", pch = "+")
points(data.neg$x1, data.neg$x2, col = "red", pch = 4)
svm.fit = svm(as.factor(y) ~ x1 + x2, data, gamma = 1)
svm.pred = predict(svm.fit, data)
data.pos = data[svm.pred == 1, ]
data.neg = data[svm.pred == 0, ]
plot(data.pos$x1, data.pos$x2, col = "blue", xlab = "X1", ylab = "X2", pch = "+")
points(data.neg$x1, data.neg$x2, col = "red", pch = 4)
The experiment perfromed covers the idea of SVMS are important to use for finding non linear models.using cross validation would be easier with the parameter of gamma
Q7. In this problem, you will use support vector approaches in order to predict whether a given car gets high or low gas mileage based on the Auto data set.
library(ISLR)
gas.med = median(Auto$mpg)
new.var = ifelse(Auto$mpg > gas.med, 1, 0)
Auto$mpglevel = as.factor(new.var)
library(e1071)
set.seed(3255)
tune.out = tune(svm, mpglevel ~ ., data = Auto, kernel = "linear", ranges = list(cost = c(0.01,
0.1, 1, 5, 10, 100)))
summary(tune.out)
##
## Parameter tuning of 'svm':
##
## - sampling method: 10-fold cross validation
##
## - best parameters:
## cost
## 1
##
## - best performance: 0.01269231
##
## - Detailed performance results:
## cost error dispersion
## 1 1e-02 0.07397436 0.06863413
## 2 1e-01 0.05102564 0.06923024
## 3 1e+00 0.01269231 0.02154160
## 4 5e+00 0.01519231 0.01760469
## 5 1e+01 0.02025641 0.02303772
## 6 1e+02 0.03294872 0.02898463
set.seed(21)
tune.out = tune(svm, mpglevel ~ ., data = Auto, kernel = "polynomial", ranges = list(cost = c(0.1,
1, 5, 10), degree = c(2, 3, 4)))
summary(tune.out)
##
## Parameter tuning of 'svm':
##
## - sampling method: 10-fold cross validation
##
## - best parameters:
## cost degree
## 10 2
##
## - best performance: 0.5435897
##
## - Detailed performance results:
## cost degree error dispersion
## 1 0.1 2 0.5587821 0.04538579
## 2 1.0 2 0.5587821 0.04538579
## 3 5.0 2 0.5587821 0.04538579
## 4 10.0 2 0.5435897 0.05611162
## 5 0.1 3 0.5587821 0.04538579
## 6 1.0 3 0.5587821 0.04538579
## 7 5.0 3 0.5587821 0.04538579
## 8 10.0 3 0.5587821 0.04538579
## 9 0.1 4 0.5587821 0.04538579
## 10 1.0 4 0.5587821 0.04538579
## 11 5.0 4 0.5587821 0.04538579
## 12 10.0 4 0.5587821 0.04538579
set.seed(463)
tune.out = tune(svm, mpglevel ~ ., data = Auto, kernel = "radial", ranges = list(cost = c(0.1,
1, 5, 10), gamma = c(0.01, 0.1, 1, 5, 10, 100)))
summary(tune.out)
##
## Parameter tuning of 'svm':
##
## - sampling method: 10-fold cross validation
##
## - best parameters:
## cost gamma
## 10 0.01
##
## - best performance: 0.02551282
##
## - Detailed performance results:
## cost gamma error dispersion
## 1 0.1 1e-02 0.09429487 0.04814900
## 2 1.0 1e-02 0.07897436 0.03875105
## 3 5.0 1e-02 0.05352564 0.02532795
## 4 10.0 1e-02 0.02551282 0.02417610
## 5 0.1 1e-01 0.07891026 0.03847631
## 6 1.0 1e-01 0.05602564 0.02881876
## 7 5.0 1e-01 0.03826923 0.03252085
## 8 10.0 1e-01 0.03320513 0.02964746
## 9 0.1 1e+00 0.57660256 0.05479863
## 10 1.0 1e+00 0.06628205 0.02996211
## 11 5.0 1e+00 0.06115385 0.02733573
## 12 10.0 1e+00 0.06115385 0.02733573
## 13 0.1 5e+00 0.57660256 0.05479863
## 14 1.0 5e+00 0.51538462 0.06642516
## 15 5.0 5e+00 0.50775641 0.07152757
## 16 10.0 5e+00 0.50775641 0.07152757
## 17 0.1 1e+01 0.57660256 0.05479863
## 18 1.0 1e+01 0.53833333 0.05640443
## 19 5.0 1e+01 0.53070513 0.05708644
## 20 10.0 1e+01 0.53070513 0.05708644
## 21 0.1 1e+02 0.57660256 0.05479863
## 22 1.0 1e+02 0.57660256 0.05479863
## 23 5.0 1e+02 0.57660256 0.05479863
## 24 10.0 1e+02 0.57660256 0.05479863
svm.linear = svm(mpglevel ~ ., data = Auto, kernel = "linear", cost = 1)
svm.poly = svm(mpglevel ~ ., data = Auto, kernel = "polynomial", cost = 10,
degree = 2)
svm.radial = svm(mpglevel ~ ., data = Auto, kernel = "radial", cost = 10, gamma = 0.01)
plotpairs = function(fit) {
for (name in names(Auto)[!(names(Auto) %in% c("mpg", "mpglevel", "name"))]) {
plot(fit, Auto, as.formula(paste("mpg~", name, sep = "")))
}
}
plotpairs(svm.linear)
plotpairs(svm.poly)
plotpairs(svm.radial)
Q8. This problem involves the OJ data set which is part of the ISLR package.
library(ISLR)
set.seed(9004)
train = sample(dim(OJ)[1], 800)
OJ.train = OJ[train, ]
OJ.test = OJ[-train, ]
library(e1071)
svm.linear = svm(Purchase ~ ., kernel = "linear", data = OJ.train, cost = 0.01)
summary(svm.linear)
##
## Call:
## svm(formula = Purchase ~ ., data = OJ.train, kernel = "linear", cost = 0.01)
##
##
## Parameters:
## SVM-Type: C-classification
## SVM-Kernel: linear
## cost: 0.01
##
## Number of Support Vectors: 442
##
## ( 222 220 )
##
##
## Number of Classes: 2
##
## Levels:
## CH MM
train.pred = predict(svm.linear, OJ.train)
table(OJ.train$Purchase, train.pred)
## train.pred
## CH MM
## CH 432 51
## MM 80 237
test.pred = predict(svm.linear, OJ.test)
table(OJ.test$Purchase, test.pred)
## test.pred
## CH MM
## CH 146 24
## MM 22 78
set.seed(1554)
tune.out = tune(svm, Purchase ~ ., data = OJ.train, kernel = "linear", ranges = list(cost = 10^seq(-2,
1, by = 0.25)))
summary(tune.out)
##
## Parameter tuning of 'svm':
##
## - sampling method: 10-fold cross validation
##
## - best parameters:
## cost
## 3.162278
##
## - best performance: 0.1625
##
## - Detailed performance results:
## cost error dispersion
## 1 0.01000000 0.16750 0.03395258
## 2 0.01778279 0.16875 0.02960973
## 3 0.03162278 0.16625 0.02638523
## 4 0.05623413 0.16875 0.03076005
## 5 0.10000000 0.16875 0.02901748
## 6 0.17782794 0.16750 0.02838231
## 7 0.31622777 0.17000 0.02898755
## 8 0.56234133 0.16875 0.02841288
## 9 1.00000000 0.16500 0.03106892
## 10 1.77827941 0.16500 0.03106892
## 11 3.16227766 0.16250 0.03118048
## 12 5.62341325 0.16375 0.02664713
## 13 10.00000000 0.16750 0.02581989
svm.linear = svm(Purchase ~ ., kernel = "linear", data = OJ.train, cost = tune.out$best.parameters$cost)
train.pred = predict(svm.linear, OJ.train)
table(OJ.train$Purchase, train.pred)
## train.pred
## CH MM
## CH 428 55
## MM 74 243
test.pred = predict(svm.linear, OJ.test)
table(OJ.test$Purchase, test.pred)
## test.pred
## CH MM
## CH 146 24
## MM 20 80
set.seed(410)
svm.radial = svm(Purchase ~ ., data = OJ.train, kernel = "radial")
summary(svm.radial)
##
## Call:
## svm(formula = Purchase ~ ., data = OJ.train, kernel = "radial")
##
##
## Parameters:
## SVM-Type: C-classification
## SVM-Kernel: radial
## cost: 1
##
## Number of Support Vectors: 371
##
## ( 188 183 )
##
##
## Number of Classes: 2
##
## Levels:
## CH MM
train.pred = predict(svm.radial, OJ.train)
table(OJ.train$Purchase, train.pred)
## train.pred
## CH MM
## CH 441 42
## MM 74 243
test.pred = predict(svm.radial, OJ.test)
table(OJ.test$Purchase, test.pred)
## test.pred
## CH MM
## CH 148 22
## MM 27 73
set.seed(755)
tune.out = tune(svm, Purchase ~ ., data = OJ.train, kernel = "radial", ranges = list(cost = 10^seq(-2,
1, by = 0.25)))
summary(tune.out)
##
## Parameter tuning of 'svm':
##
## - sampling method: 10-fold cross validation
##
## - best parameters:
## cost
## 0.3162278
##
## - best performance: 0.1675
##
## - Detailed performance results:
## cost error dispersion
## 1 0.01000000 0.39625 0.06615691
## 2 0.01778279 0.39625 0.06615691
## 3 0.03162278 0.35375 0.09754807
## 4 0.05623413 0.20000 0.04249183
## 5 0.10000000 0.17750 0.04073969
## 6 0.17782794 0.17125 0.03120831
## 7 0.31622777 0.16750 0.04216370
## 8 0.56234133 0.16750 0.03782269
## 9 1.00000000 0.17250 0.03670453
## 10 1.77827941 0.17750 0.03374743
## 11 3.16227766 0.18000 0.04005205
## 12 5.62341325 0.18000 0.03446012
## 13 10.00000000 0.18625 0.04427267
svm.radial = svm(Purchase ~ ., data = OJ.train, kernel = "radial", cost = tune.out$best.parameters$cost)
train.pred = predict(svm.radial, OJ.train)
table(OJ.train$Purchase, train.pred)
## train.pred
## CH MM
## CH 440 43
## MM 81 236
Overall, which approach seems to give the best results on this data? there appears to be minimun misclaffidication on both the train and testing data.