Day 11

This post is about yesterday (7/27/2017). I am writing it the day after because we returned from the field trip late last night.

Yesterday I continued running the trials on PCA with different numbers of components, because I had not been able to run it over the previous night. When I got to the lab, Ron helped me set up the software so that I would be able to run programs overnight in the future. At the lab, I finished the trials on PCA with whitening, and I began the trials on PCA without whitening. Meanwhile, I continued working on descriptions of each preprocessing method and created a chart with the results from my research on each method. Since I was nearing the completion of my preprocessing experiments, Ron introduced me to my next experiment: I would be doing research on each of five classifiers, two of which (Linear SVM and SVM-RBF) I was already familiar with.

Yesterday we (the Imaging Science interns) also went on a field trip. We went by bus to the Mees Observatory to see its twenty-four inch reflector telescope. I had actually been to the observatory before and had looked through the telescope. When we arrived at the observatory, Henry, who was also a tour guide there, gave us a presentation with some background on the telescope and some information about the upcoming solar eclipse (which I will be traveling to see). We walked up the hill to the observatory, and we were able to see the telescope, but unfortunately it was too cloudy that night to look through it. However, we learned about how the telescope works and about its abilities. We rode back to RIT on the bus, returning around 11:15 at night.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Day 6

I began today by finishing the documentation I had been doing of the code for my experiment. After that, I began working on new code that would test the performance of data preprocessing methods that were already written. I am using the Pavia University scene, which is a set of labeled hyperspectral data. I began to write code to run the experiment, which will include testing various preprocessing methods each with thirty trials. In the process, I used the code from my first tutorial as a reference, and I found an error in that code that had been making it run too slowly. It had been using too much data to train. I fixed this issue, making that code run more quickly, and continued with the code for my experiment. Eventually, in my experiment code, I ran into a problem: I was shaping the data into different dimensions to split it into training and testing groups, but it had to be in its original dimensions to be used by the preprocessing methods. I am still working on this issue, and I ...
Read more

Day 14

Today I continued testing different parameters for the MLP classifier. While I ran tests, I finished documenting the classifiers that I am testing. I also wrote an introduction to my descriptions of the preprocessing methods, finished citations for the descriptions, and wrote a summary of my preprocessing experiment in an article being written in Overleaf about the machine learning pipeline. Although I am not yet ready to test the next classifier, RandomForest, I began writing code to test for the optimal preprocessing methods and parameters to use with it. Throughout the day, I collected data on the metrics of different combinations of parameters for MLP. I looked through this data and ran a larger number of trials on the most promising parameters, but it still appears that the default parameters are the most accurate, even though the overall accuracy resulting from the default parameters averages at about seventy percent, which is not very good compared to the other two classifiers I...
Read more

Day 3

Today I began by implementing the changes in the tutorial that Ron and I had previously discussed. I used arrays in my code instead of multilevel lists, because the machine learning program requires arrays. I then used two different machine learning programs, one linear and one non-linear, to process the training data and predict the second array of testing data based on the first. The linear learning program (a Linear Support Vector Machine) was more successful and now only takes about two minutes to train and make its predictions. I ran metrics to test the accuracy of the linear program, such as overall accuracy, mean-class accuracy, and kappa statistic, and it proved to be fairly accurate. Later in the tutorial, the accuracy will be improved with further measures. However, the non-linear program (a Support Vector Machine with Radial Basis Function kernel) is still too slow and inefficient. I am not certain why this is, but tomorrow I hope to fix this issue.
Read more