Day 17

Today, using the parameters I had previously found through the search, I continued my classifier experiment by running trials on the MLP classifier and recording the results. These results, however, turned out not to be very good, and presented an average overall accuracy of about fifty percent. I tried to improve the MLP's performance in various ways, such as using different numbers of epochs in each trial. I also increased the patience value, which is the number of epochs through which the program will go before it terminates the trial early. It seems that early stopping is a serious inhibitor of accuracy. So far, these changes have not significantly improved the accuracy, though. While the trials were running, I finished writing and citing descriptions of the classifiers I am testing in the Overleaf document. I also wrote an overview of the machine learning pipeline, and edited and added a diagram of the progression of the pipeline that I had previously made. I also prepared to test the Random Forest and SNN (Self-Normalizing Neural Network) classifiers by altering my parameter search code.
Also, today was the Undergraduate Research Symposium. Ryan and I went down to the Sustainability Building to see the poster presentations being given there. I spent the most time at the presentations of Angelina (a student in my lab) and of George (another student from McQuaid, my high school). Angelina's presentation was about "catastrophic forgetting," which is a major problem in machine learning where programs are not able to retain memory from a previous learning task after beginning a new one. George, who is doing a different internship at RIT, gave a presentation on his research on the survival of daphnia, which are a type of transparent water flea. Even though that's kind of weird, George's presentation was still good. I guess if I ever need to know about water fleas, I will be overprepared.


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