Day 12

Today, while I finished running my tests on PCA without whitening, I wrote my outline for the presentation on the research I am doing. In the outline, I divided my presentation into two sections: the first is Reason/Explanation and the second is Methods and Results. I went into much detail describing the reasoning and background behind my project, while I was more general about the methods and results of each of my experiments. This is because I have only finished one experiment so far, so I have limited results to share. (However, I included the table of results from my first experiment, evaluating preprocessors, in the outline.) After I finished writing my outline, I wrote code to produce line graphs of the data from the PCA tests, which were finally done running. The graph shows mean-class accuracy in relation to the number of components. Unfortunately, the graph did not show any obvious pattern, but it did show that PCA with whitening is significantly different than PCA with whitening.
Also, today I started coding for my next experiment, which is to evaluate different machine learning classifiers. I was able to reuse much of the code from the preprocessing experiment, but I had to alter it to test different classifiers with certain preprocessors instead of testing different preprocessors with the same classifier. I was even able to run thirty trials and record the results from each of the first two classifiers, which are Linear SVM and SVM-RBF. Tomorrow I plan to begin testing the other classifiers, which will be more challenging than the first two because I have to determine the best parameters and preprocessing methods to use for them, unlike for the SVMs.

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