Ho can I create a loop to fit models with increasing number of predictors. The first iteration should
use one predictor, then two, and so on until all predictors are included. I have to compute the RMSE
on both the training and test data for this model, and store these values in a list/array.
predictors = ['bedrooms','bathrooms','sqft_living','sqft_lot','floors',
'waterfront','view','condition','grade','sqft_above',
'sqft_basement','yr_built','yr_renovated','zipcode','lat',
'long','sqft_living15','sqft_lot15']
models = []
formula = 'price ~ bedrooms'
for p in predictors[0:19]:
formula = formula + p
print(formula)
model_linear_kc_5 = smf.ols(formula=formula, data=df_train_kc)
models.append(model_linear_kc_5.fit())
My code so far but I know this isn't right and am stuck how to do it.
I have to put print(formula) inside loop and then adjust the formula = … line until it does what I want it to.
I would really appreciate help in this regard. Thank you.
Related
I performed an ANOVA and corrected it with Tukey's test, so I got several values of P.
Now I would like to build a Heatmap with these values and for that I need to create an matrix with the values of P to be able to make my Heat map
The first question would be how to fill a matrix with the anova p-values?
Then I made an ancova and obtained other p-values.
Now I would like to make a heatmap to compare these p-values between the anova and the ancova.
Can someone help me ?
I will exemplify
anova_model <- aov( X ~ groups , data = T1)
postHocs <- glht(anova_model, linfct = mcp(groups = "Tukey"))
summary(postHocs)
This anova gave me several values of P(!)
ancova_model <- aov( X ~ groups + age , data = T1)
postHocs <- glht(ancova_model, lymphct = mcp(groups = "Tukey"))
summary(postHocs)
This ancova gave me several other values of P(!)
I would now like to create a Heat map to compare these P values. To see for example when age interferes a lot or not. I believe that before the ideal is to create a matrix before but I'm actually kind of lost.
Could someone help me?
Thank you very much
Given a dataset of blood results, say cholesterol level, and knowing that the instrument that produced those results is subject to a known degree of variability, how would I add that variability back into the dataset? i.e. I want to assume the result in the original dataset is the true/mean value, and then produce new results that are subject to the known variability of the instrument.
In Excel you use =NORM.INV(RAND(), mean, std_dev), where RAND() provides a random value between 0 and 1, "mean" will be the original value and I have the CV so I can calculate the SD. NORM.INV then provides the inverse of the cumulative normal distribution function.
I've done the following to create a new column with my new values, but would like to know if it is valid (i.e., will each row have a different random number between 0 and 1 as the probability? and is this formula equivalent to NORM.INV?
df8000['HDL_1'] = norm.ppf(random(), loc = df8000['HDL_0'], scale = TAE_df.loc[0,'HDL'])
Thanks in advance!
Hello hopefully someone can help me... I am absolutely new to programming.
I just want to multiply two matrices in Julia with a for loop. It is about the frequency of a oscillation table at continuous casting in a steel plant. The below function calculates the frequency (=freqres) for a given mold stroke and casting speed(vc). The result is the frequency of the oscillation table for a given casting speed (from 1000mm/min to 6000mm/min).
vc = [1000:100:6000;]
function freqcalc(vc,stroke)
for i in vc
push!(freqres, 3i/4stroke)
end
end
Now I want to calculate the negative strip time with the following formula:
nst = (60/(pi*freqres))*acos(vc/(pi*stroke*freqres))
With the below command I did not achieve the desired result, I think due to a nested condition.
nstres = Float64[]
for i in vc, j in freqres
push!(nstres, (60/(pi*j))*acos(i/(pi*stroke*j)))
end
I just want to have the result of every entry of vc and freqres of the above formula in nstres.
push!(nstres, (60/(pi*freqres1))*acos(vc1/(pi*stroke*freqres1)))
push!(nstres, (60/(pi*freqres2))*acos(vc2/(pi*stroke*freqres2)))
I hope I could clarify my question, and thanks for your comments, I very appreciate it.
I want to train a model using the tensorflow estimator and want to track multiple metrics during training end evaluation. The metrics i want to track are accruacy and mean intersection-over-union (and my loss).
I managed to figure out how to track the accuracy during training:
if mode == tf.estimator.ModeKeys.TRAIN:
...
accuracy = tf.metrics.accuracy(labels=indices_ground_truth, predictions=indices_prediction, name='acc_op')
tf.summary.scalar('accuracy', accuracy[1])
and evaluation:
if mode == tf.estimator.ModeKeys.EVAL:
...
accuracy = tf.metrics.accuracy(labels=indices_ground_truth, predictions=indices_prediction)
eval_metric_ops = {'accuracy': accuracy}
return tf.estimator.EstimatorSpec(mode, loss=loss, eval_metric_ops=eval_metric_ops)
For evaluation the mean intersection over union works the same. So its actually:
if mode == tf.estimator.ModeKeys.EVAL:
...
miou = tf.metrics.mean_iou(labels=indices_ground_truth, predictions=indices_prediction, num_classes=13)
accuracy = tf.metrics.accuracy(labels=indices_ground_truth, predictions=indices_prediction)
eval_metric_ops = {'miou': miou,
'accuracy': accuracy}
return tf.estimator.EstimatorSpec(mode, loss=loss, eval_metric_ops=eval_metric_ops)
As far as i know i have to track the update operation (the second return value) on the value during training. Otherwise it returns 0 every time. For a single value like the accuracy that works.
But for the miou the second return value is the update operation of the confusion matrix used to calculate the miou. Thats a [numClass,numClass] tensor. If i try to track it like the accuracy tf.summary.scalar('miou', miou[1]) it crashes because a [numClass,numClass] tensor is not a scalar.
tf.summary.scalar('miou', miou[0]) gives me 0s everytime.
So how can i give the miou to the summary?
Here is how I calculate the IoU while training:
mIoU, update_op = tf.contrib.metrics.streaming_mean_iou(predict, raw_gt, num_classes=2, weights=None)
tf.summary.scalar('meanIoU', mIoU)
confusion_matrix, _ = sess.run([update_op, train_op], feed_dict=feed_dict)
iou = sess.run(mIoU)
print('iou score = {:.3f}, ({:.3f} sec/step)'.format(iou, duration))
You don't need to track the confusion matrix output to track the IoU on tensorboard. The above works fine for me. I think, what you are missing is running the tensors in your session. You need to run update_op such as sess.run(update_op), while running metric operations as sess.run(iou)
I´m having serious performance issues with a job that is running everyday and I think i cannot improve the algorithm; so I´m gonnga explain you what is the problem to solve and the algorithm we have, and maybe you have some other ideas to solve the problem better.
So the problem we have to solve is:
There is a set of Rules, ~ 120.000 Rules.
Every rule has a set of combinations of Codes. Codes are basically strings. So we have ~8 combinations per rule. Example of a combination: TTAAT;ZZUHH;GGZZU;WWOOF;SSJJW;FFFOLL
There is a set of Objects, ~800 objects.
Every object has a set of ~200 codes.
We have to check for every Rule, if there is at least one Combination of Codes that is fully contained in the Objects. It means =>
loop in Rules
Loop in Combinations of the rule
Loop in Objects
every code of the combination found in the Object? => create relationship rule/object and continue with the next object
end of loop
end of loop
end of loop
For example, if we have the Rule with this combination of two codes: HHGGT; ZZUUF
And let´s say we have an object with this codes: HHGGT; DHZZU; OIJUH; ZHGTF; HHGGT; JUHZT; ZZUUF; TGRFE; UHZGT; FCDXS
Then we create a relationship between the Object and the Rule because every code of the combination of the rule is contained in the codes of the object => this is what the algorithm has to do.
As you can see this is quite expensive, because we need 120.000 x 8 x 800 = 750 millions of times in the worst-case scenario.
This is a simplified scenario of the real problem; actually what we do in the loops is a little bit more complicated, that´s why we have to reduce this somehow.
I tried to think in a solution but I don´t have any ideas!
Do you see something wrong here?
Best regards and thank you for the time :)
Something like this might work better if I'm understanding correctly (this is in python):
RULES = [
['abc', 'def',],
['aaa', 'sfd',],
['xyy', 'eff',]]
OBJECTS = [
('rrr', 'abc', 'www', 'def'),
('pqs', 'llq', 'aaa', 'sdr'),
('xyy', 'hjk', 'fed', 'eff'),
('pnn', 'rrr', 'mmm', 'qsq')
]
MapOfCodesToObjects = {}
for obj in OBJECTS:
for code in obj:
if (code in MapOfCodesToObjects):
MapOfCodesToObjects[code].add(obj)
else:
MapOfCodesToObjects[code] = set({obj})
RELATIONS = []
for rule in RULES:
if (len(rule) == 0):
continue
if (rule[0] in MapOfCodesToObjects):
ValidObjects = MapOfCodesToObjects[rule[0]]
else:
continue
for i in range(1, len(rule)):
if (rule[i] in MapOfCodesToObjects):
codeObjects = MapOfCodesToObjects[rule[i]]
else:
ValidObjects = set()
break
ValidObjects = ValidObjects.intersection(codeObjects)
if (len(ValidObjects) == 0):
break
for vo in ValidObjects:
RELATIONS.append((rule, vo))
for R in RELATIONS:
print(R)
First you build a map of codes to objects. If there are nObj objects and nCodePerObj codes on average per object, this takes O(nObj*nCodePerObj * log(nObj*nCodePerObj).
Next you iterate through the rules and look up each code in each rule in the map you built. There is a relation if a certain object occurs for every code in the rule, i.e. if it is in the set intersection of the objects for every code in the rule. Since hash lookups have O(1) time complexity on average, and set intersection has time complexity O(min of the lengths of the 2 sets), this will take O(nRule * nCodePerRule * nObjectsPerCode), (note that is nObjectsPerCode, not nCodePerObj, the performance gets worse when one code is included in many objects).