Hello I am using Kmeans to build a topic classifier, my idea is to take several Facebook comments from different users to have several documents.
My list of documents looks as follows:
list=["comment1","comment2",...,"commentN"]
Then I used tfidf to vectorize every comment and assign it to a specific cluster,
the output of my program is the following:
tfidf = tfidf_vectorizer.fit_transform(list)
tf = tf_vectorizer.fit_transform(list)
print("size of tf",tf.shape)
print("size of tfidf",tfidf.shape)
#Creating clusters from data
kmeans = KMeans(n_clusters=8, random_state=0).fit(tf)
print("printing labels",kmeans.labels_)
#Printing the number of clusters
print("Number of clusters",set(kmeans.labels_))
print("dimensions of matrix labels",(kmeans.labels_).shape)
#Predicting new labels
y_pred = kmeans.predict(tf)
print("dimensions of predict matrix",y_pred.shape)
My output looks as follows:
size of tf (202450, 2000)
size of tfidf (202450, 2000)
printing labels [1 1 1 ..., 1 1 1]
Number of clusters {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}
dimensions of matrix labels (202450,)
dimensions of predict matrix (202450,)
C:\Program Files\Anaconda3\lib\site-packages\sklearn\utils\validation.py:420: DataConversionWarning: Data with input dtype int64 was converted to float64.
warnings.warn(msg, DataConversionWarning)
Now the problema is that I would like to find a way to give sense to this clusters I mean the class 0 is about sports, class 1 is talking about politics, so I would like to appreciate any recomendation to understand this clusters, or at least to find a way to get all the commments that belongs to a specific cluster to then interpret this result thanks for the support.
There are multiple approaches
The easiest approache is to get the centroid of each cluster, it is a good summary of most words used in the cluster.
The second approache is to get the sub matrix of tf-idf of element assigned to each cluster,
after that you can use ACP on sub matrix to extract factors , and understand more The composition of each cluster.
Sorry I do not use sckit-learn, so I cannot help you by code
Hop that will help
Related
I am working with a large tabular dataset that consists of many categorical columns. I want to train a regression model (XGBoost) in this data while using as many regressors as possible.
Because of the size of data, I am using incremental training - where following sklearn API - .fit(X, y) I am not able to fit the entire matrix X into memory and therefore I am training the model in a couple of rows at the time. The problem is that in every batch, the model is expecting the same number of columns in X.
This is where it gets tricky because some variables are categorical it may be that one-hot encoding on a batch of data will same some shape (e.g. 20 columns). However, the next batch will have (26 columns) simply because in the previous batch not every unique level of the categorical feature was present. Sklearn allows for accounting for this and costume function can also be used: To keep some number of columns in matrix X.
import seaborn as sns
import numpy as np
from sklearn.preprocessing import OneHotEncoder
def one_hot_known(dataf, list_levels, col):
"""Creates a dummy coded matrix with as many columns as unique levels"""
return np.array(
[np.eye(len(list_levels))[list_levels.index(i)] for i in dataf[col]])
# Load Some Dataset with categorical variable
df_orig = sns.load_dataset('tips')
# List of unique levels - known apriori
day_level = list(df_orig['day'].unique())
# Image, we have a batch of data (subset of original data) and one categorical level (DAY) is not present here
df = df_orig.loc[lambda d: d['day'] != 'Sun']
# Missing category is filled with 0 and in next batch, if present its columns will have 1.
OneHotEncoder(categories = [day_level], sparse=False).fit_transform(np.array(df['day']).reshape(-1, 1))
#Costum function, can be used in incremental(data batches chunk fashion)
one_hot_known(df, day_level, 'day')
What I would like to do not is to utilize the TargerEncoding approach, so that we do not have matrix X with a huge number of columns. However, it still needs to be done in an Incremental fashion, just like the OneHot Encoding above.
I am writing this as a post because I know this is very useful to many people and would like to know how to utilize the same strategy for TargetEncoding.
I am aware that Deep Learning allows for Embedding layers, which represent categorical features in continuous space but I would like to apply TargetEncoding.
I want to study a population of 47532 individuals with 16230 features. Thus I created a matrix with 16230 lines and 47532 columns
>>> import scipy.cluster.hierarchy as hcluster
>>> from scipy.spatial import distance
>>> import sklearn.cluster import AgglomerativeClustering
>>> matrix.shape
(16230, 47532)
# remove all duplicate vectors in order to not waste computation time
>>> uniq_vectors, row_index = np.unique(matrix, return_index=True, axis=0)
>>> uniq_vectors.shape
(22957, 16230)
# compute distance between each observations
>>> distance_matrix = distance.pdist(uniq_vectors, metric='jaccard')
>>> distance_matrix_2d = distance.squareform(distance_matrix, force='tomatrix')
>>> distance_matrix_2d.shape
(22957, 22957)
# Perform linkage
>>> linkage = hcluster.linkage(distance_matrix, method='complete')
So now I can use scikit-learn to perform a clustering
>>> model = AgglomerativeClustering(n_clusters=40, affinity='precomputed', linkage='complete')
>>> cluster_label = model.fit_predict(distance_matrix_2d)
How to predict future observations using this model ?
Indeed AgglomerativeClustering do not own a predict method and it will be too long to compute again the distance for 16230 x (47532 + 1)
Is it possible to compute a distance between new observations and all pre-computed cluster ?
Indeed the use of pdist from scipy will compute the distance n x n In my case I would like compute the distance from one observation o vs n samples o x n
Thanks for your highlight
The answer is simple: you cannot. Hierarchical clustering is not designed to predict cluster labels for new observations. The reason why this is happening is because it just links data points according to their distances and it is not defining "regions" for each cluster.
There are two solutions for you at this stage I believe:
For new data points, find the nearest observation in your data set (using the same distance function as during the training) and assign the same cluster label. This requires a bit more coding, and obviously, it is a bit of a hack. But keep in mind that the results might not make a lot of sense as you will be extrapolating cluster labels using a different methodology than the training procedure.
Use another clustering algorithm! It seems like you are using hierarchical clustering when your use case does not match the model. KMeans could be a good choice, as it explicitly can assign new data points to the closest cluster.
I'm using k-means for clustering with number of clusters 60. Since, some of the clusters are coming out as meaning less, I've deleted those cluster centers from cluster center array(count = 8) and saved in clean_cluster_array.
This time, I'm re-fitting k-means model with init = clean_cluster_centers. and n_clusters = 52 and max_iter = 1 because i want to avoid re-fitting as much as possible.
The basic idea is to recreate new model with clean_cluster_centers . The problem here is since, we are removing large number of clusters; The model is quickly configuring to more stable centers even with n_iter = 1. Is there any way to recreate k-means model?
If you've fitted a KMeans object, it has a cluster_centers_ attribute. You can directly update it by doing something like this:
cls.cluster_centers_ = new_cluster_centers
So if you want a new object with the clean cluster centers, just do something like the following:
cls = KMeans().fit(X)
cls2 = cls.copy()
cls2.cluster_centers_ = new_cluster_centers
And now, since the predict function only checks that your object has a non-null attribute called cluster_centers_, you can use the predict function
def predict(self, X):
"""Predict the closest cluster each sample in X belongs to.
In the vector quantization literature, `cluster_centers_` is called
the code book and each value returned by `predict` is the index of
the closest code in the code book.
Parameters
----------
X : {array-like, sparse matrix}, shape = [n_samples, n_features]
New data to predict.
Returns
-------
labels : array, shape [n_samples,]
Index of the cluster each sample belongs to.
"""
check_is_fitted(self, 'cluster_centers_')
X = self._check_test_data(X)
x_squared_norms = row_norms(X, squared=True)
return _labels_inertia(X, x_squared_norms, self.cluster_centers_)[0]
I have a corpus of wiki pages (baseball, hockey, music, football) which I'm running through tfidf and then through kmeans. After a couple issues to start (you can see my previous questions), I'm finally getting a KMeansModel...but when I try to predict, I keep getting the same center. Is this because of the small dataset, or because I'm comparing a multi-word document against a smaller amount of words(1-20) query? Or is there something else I'm doing wrong? See the below code:
//Preprocessing of data includes splitting into words
//and removing words with only 1 or 2 characters
val corpus: RDD[Seq[String]]
val hashingTF = new HashingTF(100000)
val tf = hashingTF.transform(corpus)
val idf = new IDF().fit(tf)
val tfidf = idf.transform(tf).cache
val kMeansModel = KMeans.train(tfidf, 3, 10)
val queryTf = hashingTF.transform(List("music"))
val queryTfidf = idf.transform(queryTf)
kMeansModel.predict(queryTfidf) //Always the same, no matter the term supplied
This question seems somewhat related to this one
More a checklist than an answer:
A single word query or a very short sentence is probably not a good choice especially when combined with a large feature vector. I would start with significant fragments of the documents from the corpus
Manually check similarity between query an each cluster. Is it even remotely similar to each cluster?
import breeze.linalg.{DenseVector => BDV, SparseVector => BSV, Vector => BV}
import breeze.linalg.functions.cosineDistance
import org.apache.spark.mllib.linalg.{Vector, SparseVector, DenseVector}
def toBreeze(v: Vector): BV[Double] = v match {
case DenseVector(values) => new BDV[Double](values)
case SparseVector(size, indices, values) => {
new BSV[Double](indices, values, size)
}
}
val centers = kMeansModel.clusterCenters.map(toBreeze(_))
val query = toBreeze(queryTfidf)
centers.map(c => cosineDistance(query, c))
Does K-Means converge? Depending on a dataset and initial centroids ten or twenty iterations can be not enough. Try to increase this number to one thousand or so and see if the problem persist.
Is your corpus diverse enough to form meaningful clusters? Try to find centroids for each document in you corpus. Do you get a relatively uniform distribution or almost all documents are assigned to a single cluster.
Perform visual inspection. Take your tfidf RDD convert to a matrix, apply PCA, plot, color by cluster and see if you get a meaningful results.
Plot centroids as well and check if these cover possible cluster. If not check convergence once again.
You can also check similarities between centroids:
(0 until centers.size)
.toList
.flatMap(i => ((i + 1) until centers.size)
.map(j => (i, j, 1 - cosineDistance(centers(i), centers(j)))))
Is your pre-processing thorough enough? Simple removal of the short words most likely won't suffice. I would at lest extend it using with stopwords removal. Some stemming wouldn't hurt too.
K-Means results depend on the initial centroids. Try running an algorithm multiple times an see if problem persists.
Try more sophisticated algorithm like LDA
I was looking at the Spark 1.5 dataframe/row api and the implementation for the logistic regression. As I understand, the train method therein first converts the dataframe to RDD[LabeledPoint] as,
override protected def train(dataset: DataFrame): LogisticRegressionModel = {
// Extract columns from data. If dataset is persisted, do not persist oldDataset.
val instances = extractLabeledPoints(dataset).map {
case LabeledPoint(label: Double, features: Vector) => (label, features)
}
...
And then it proceeds to feature standardization, etc.
What I am confused with is, the DataFrame is of type RDD[Row] and Row is allowed to have any valueTypes, for e.g. (1, true, "a string", null) seems a valid row of a dataframe. If that is so, what does the extractLabeledPoints above mean? It seems it is selecting only Array[Double] as the feature values in Vector. What happens if a column in the data-frame was strings? Also, what happens to the integer categorical values?
Thanks in advance,
Nikhil
Lets ignore Spark for a moment. Generally speaking linear models, including logistic regression, expect numeric independent variables. It is not in any way specific to Spark / MLlib. If input contains categorical or ordinal variables these have to be encoded first. Some languages, like R, handle this in a transparent manner:
> df <- data.frame(x1 = c("a", "b", "c", "d"), y=c("aa", "aa", "bb", "bb"))
> glm(y ~ x1, df, family="binomial")
Call: glm(formula = y ~ x1, family = "binomial", data = df)
Coefficients:
(Intercept) x1b x1c x1d
-2.357e+01 -4.974e-15 4.713e+01 4.713e+01
...
but what is really used behind the scenes is so called design matrix:
> model.matrix( ~ x1, df)
(Intercept) x1b x1c x1d
1 1 0 0 0
2 1 1 0 0
3 1 0 1 0
4 1 0 0 1
...
Skipping over the details it is the same type of transformation as the one performed by the OneHotEncoder in Spark.
import org.apache.spark.mllib.linalg.Vector
import org.apache.spark.ml.feature.{OneHotEncoder, StringIndexer}
val df = sqlContext.createDataFrame(Seq(
Tuple1("a"), Tuple1("b"), Tuple1("c"), Tuple1("d")
)).toDF("x").repartition(1)
val indexer = new StringIndexer()
.setInputCol("x")
.setOutputCol("xIdx")
.fit(df)
val indexed = indexer.transform(df)
val encoder = new OneHotEncoder()
.setInputCol("xIdx")
.setOutputCol("xVec")
val encoded = encoder.transform(indexed)
encoded
.select($"xVec")
.map(_.getAs[Vector]("xVec").toDense)
.foreach(println)
Spark goes one step further and all features, even if algorithm allows nominal/ordinal independent variables, have to be stored as Double using a spark.mllib.linalg.Vector. In case of spark.ml it is a DataFrame column, in spark.mllib a field in spark.mllib.regression.LabeledPoint.
Depending on a model interpretation of the feature vector can be different though. As mentioned above for linear model these will be interpreted as numerical variables. For Naive Bayes theses are considered nominal. If model accepts both numerical and nominal variables Spark and treats each group in a different way, like decision / regression trees, you can provide categoricalFeaturesInfo parameter.
It is worth pointing out that dependent variables should be encoded as Double as well but, unlike independent variables, may require additional metadata to be handled properly. If you take a look at the indexed DataFrame you'll see that StringIndexer not only transforms x, but also adds attributes:
scala> org.apache.spark.ml.attribute.Attribute.fromStructField(indexed.schema(1))
res12: org.apache.spark.ml.attribute.Attribute = {"vals":["d","a","b","c"],"type":"nominal","name":"xIdx"}
Finally some Transformers from ML, like VectorIndexer, can automatically detect and encode categorical variables based on the number of distinct values.
Copying clarification from zero323 in the comments:
Categorical values before being passed to MLlib / ML estimators have to be encoded as Double. There quite a few built-in transformers like StringIndexer or OneHotEncoder which can be helpful here. If algorithm treats categorical features in a different manner than a numerical ones, like for example DecisionTree, you identify which variables are categorical using categoricalFeaturesInfo.
Finally some transformers use special attributes on columns to distinguish between different types of attributes.