[scikit-learn] Random StratifiedKFold Grid Search CV

[Raga Markely]

Hi Sebastian,

Sorry, I used the wrong terms (I was referring to algo as model).. great
then, i think what i have is aligned with your workflow..

Thank you very much for your help!

Have a good weekend,
Raga

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Sebastian Raschka <se.raschka at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi, Raga,
>
> sounds good, but I am wondering a bit about the order. 2) should come
> before 1), right? Because model selection is basically done via hyperparam
> optimization.
>
> Not saying that this is the optimal/right approach, but I usually do it
> like this:
>
> 1.) algo selection via nested cv
> 2.) model selection based on best algo via k-fold on whole training set
> 3.) fit best algo w. best hyperparams (from 2.) to whole training set
> 4.) evaluate on test set
> 5.) fit classifier to whole dataset, done
>
> Best,
> Sebastian
>
> > On Jan 27, 2017, at 12:49 PM, Sebastian Raschka <
> mail at sebastianraschka.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, Raga,
> >
> > sounds good, but I am wondering a bit about the order. 2) should come
> before 1), right? Because model selection is basically done via hyperparam
> optimization.
> >
> > Not saying that this is the optimal/right approach, but I usually do it
> like this:
> >
> > 1.) algo selection via nested cv
> > 2.) model selection based on best algo via k-fold on whole training set
> > 3.) fit best algo w. best hyperparams (from 2.) to whole training set
> > 4.) evaluate on test set
> > 5.) fit classifier to whole dataset, done
> >
> > Best,
> > Sebastian
> >
> >> On Jan 27, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Raga Markely <raga.markely at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Sounds good, Sebastian.. thanks for the suggestions..
> >>
> >> My dataset is relatively small (only ~35 samples), and this is the
> workflow I have set up so far..
> >> 1. Model selection: use nested loop using cross_val_score(GridSearchCV(...),...)
> same as shown in the scikit-learn page that you provided - the results show
> no statistically significant difference in accuracy mean +/- SD among
> classifiers.. this is expected as the pattern is pretty obvious and simple
> to separate by eyes after dimensionality reduction (I use pipeline of
> stdscaler, LDA, and classifier)... so i take all of them and use voting
> classifier in step #3..
> >> 2. Hyperparameter optimization: use GridSearchCV to optimize
> hyperparameters of each classifiers
> >> 3. Decision Region: use the hyperparameters from step #2, fit each
> classifier separately to the whole dataset, and use voting classifier to
> get decision region
> >>
> >> This sounds reasonable?
> >>
> >> Thank you very much!
> >> Raga
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:31 PM, Sebastian Raschka <
> se.raschka at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> You are welcome! And in addition, if you select among different
> algorithms, here are some more suggestions
> >>
> >> a) don’t do it based on your independent test set if this is going to
> your final model performance estimate, or be aware that it would be overly
> optimistic
> >> b) also, it’s not the best idea to select algorithms using
> cross-validation on the same training set that you used for model
> selection; a more robust way would be nested CV (e.g,.
> http://scikit-learn.org/stable/auto_examples/model_
> selection/plot_nested_cross_validation_iris.html)
> >>
> >> But yeah, it all depends on your dataset and size. If you have a neural
> net that takes week to train, and if you have a large dataset anyway so
> that you can set aside large sets for testing, I’d train on
> train/validation splits and evaluate on the test set. And to compare e.g.,
> two networks against each other on large test sets, you could do a McNemar
> test.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Sebastian
> >>
> >>> On Jan 26, 2017, at 8:09 PM, Raga Markely <raga.markely at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Ahh.. nice.. I will use that.. thanks a lot, Sebastian!
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Raga
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Sebastian Raschka <
> se.raschka at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Hi, Raga,
> >>>
> >>> I think that if GridSearchCV is used for classification, the
> stratified k-fold doesn’t do shuffling by default.
> >>>
> >>> Say you do 20 grid search repetitions, you could then do sth like:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> from sklearn.model_selection import StratifiedKFold
> >>>
> >>> for i in range(n_reps):
> >>>    k_fold = StratifiedKFold(n_splits=5, shuffle=True, random_state=i)
> >>>    gs = GridSearchCV(..., cv=k_fold)
> >>>    ...
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Sebastian
> >>>
> >>>> On Jan 26, 2017, at 5:39 PM, Raga Markely <raga.markely at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>> I was trying to do repeated Grid Search CV (20 repeats). I thought
> that each time I call GridSearchCV, the training and test sets separated in
> different splits would be different.
> >>>>
> >>>> However, I got the same best_params_ and best_scores_ for all 20
> repeats. It looks like the training and test sets are separated in
> identical folds in each run? Just to clarify, e.g. I have the following
> data: 0,1,2,3,4. Class 1 = [0,1,2] and Class 2 = [3,4]. Suppose I call cv =
> 2. The split is always for instance [0,3] [1,2,4] in each repeat, and I
> couldn't get [1,3] [0,2,4] or other combinations.
> >>>>
> >>>> If I understand correctly, GridSearchCV uses StratifiedKFold when I
> enter cv = integer. The StratifiedKFold command has random state; I wonder
> if there is anyway I can make the the training and test sets randomly
> separated each time I call the GridSearchCV?
> >>>>
> >>>> Just a note, I used the following classifiers: Logistic Regression,
> KNN, SVC, Kernel SVC, Random Forest, and had the same observation
> regardless of the classifiers.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you very much!
> >>>> Raga
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> scikit-learn mailing list
> >>>> scikit-learn at python.org
> >>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> scikit-learn mailing list
> >>> scikit-learn at python.org
> >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> scikit-learn mailing list
> >>> scikit-learn at python.org
> >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> scikit-learn mailing list
> >> scikit-learn at python.org
> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> scikit-learn mailing list
> >> scikit-learn at python.org
> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > scikit-learn mailing list
> > scikit-learn at python.org
> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
>
> _______________________________________________
> scikit-learn mailing list
> scikit-learn at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/scikit-learn/attachments/20170127/b7fc7f3a/attachment-0001.html>