Welcome to the first project of the Machine Learning Engineer Nanodegree! In this notebook, some template code has already been provided for you, and you will need to implement additional functionality to successfully complete this project. You will not need to modify the included code beyond what is requested. Sections that begin with 'Implementation' in the header indicate that the following block of code will require additional functionality which you must provide. Instructions will be provided for each section and the specifics of the implementation are marked in the code block with a 'TODO' statement. Please be sure to read the instructions carefully!
In addition to implementing code, there will be questions that you must answer which relate to the project and your implementation. Each section where you will answer a question is preceded by a 'Question X' header. Carefully read each question and provide thorough answers in the following text boxes that begin with 'Answer:'. Your project submission will be evaluated based on your answers to each of the questions and the implementation you provide.
Note: Code and Markdown cells can be executed using the Shift + Enter keyboard shortcut. In addition, Markdown cells can be edited by typically double-clicking the cell to enter edit mode.
In this project, you will evaluate the performance and predictive power of a model that has been trained and tested on data collected from homes in suburbs of Boston, Massachusetts. A model trained on this data that is seen as a good fit could then be used to make certain predictions about a home — in particular, its monetary value. This model would prove to be invaluable for someone like a real estate agent who could make use of such information on a daily basis.
The dataset for this project originates from the UCI Machine Learning Repository. The Boston housing data was collected in 1978 and each of the 506 entries represent aggregated data about 14 features for homes from various suburbs in Boston, Massachusetts. For the purposes of this project, the following preoprocessing steps have been made to the dataset:
'MDEV'
value of 50.0. These data points likely contain missing or censored values and have been removed.'RM'
value of 8.78. This data point can be considered an outlier and has been removed.'RM'
, 'LSTAT'
, 'PTRATIO'
, and 'MDEV'
are essential. The remaining non-relevant features have been excluded.'MDEV'
has been multiplicatively scaled to account for 35 years of market inflation.Run the code cell below to load the Boston housing dataset, along with a few of the necessary Python libraries required for this project. You will know the dataset loaded successfully if the size of the dataset is reported.
# Import libraries necessary for this project
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import visuals as vs # Supplementary code
from sklearn.cross_validation import ShuffleSplit
# Pretty display for notebooks
%matplotlib inline
# Load the Boston housing dataset
data = pd.read_csv('housing.csv')
prices = data['MDEV']
features = data.drop('MDEV', axis = 1)
# Success
print "Boston housing dataset has {} data points with {} variables each.".format(*data.shape)
data.shape
In this first section of this project, you will make a cursory investigation about the Boston housing data and provide your observations. Familiarizing yourself with the data through an explorative process is a fundamental practice to help you better understand and justify your results.
Since the main goal of this project is to construct a working model which has the capability of predicting the value of houses, we will need to separate the dataset into features and the target variable. The features, 'RM'
, 'LSTAT'
, and 'PTRATIO'
, give us quantitative information about each data point. The target variable, 'MDEV'
, will be the variable we seek to predict. These are stored in features
and prices
, respectively.
For your very first coding implementation, you will calculate descriptive statistics about the Boston housing prices. Since numpy
has already been imported for you, use this library to perform the necessary calculations. These statistics will be extremely important later on to analyze various prediction results from the constructed model.
In the code cell below, you will need to implement the following:
'MDEV'
, which is stored in prices
.# TODO: Minimum price of the data
minimum_price = np.min(prices)
# TODO: Maximum price of the data
maximum_price = np.max(prices)
# TODO: Mean price of the data
mean_price = np.mean(prices)
# TODO: Median price of the data
median_price = np.median(prices)
# TODO: Standard deviation of prices of the data
std_price = np.std(prices)
# Show the calculated statistics
print "Statistics for Boston housing dataset:\n"
print "Minimum price: ${:,.2f}".format(minimum_price)
print "Maximum price: ${:,.2f}".format(maximum_price)
print "Mean price: ${:,.2f}".format(mean_price)
print "Median price ${:,.2f}".format(median_price)
print "Standard deviation of prices: ${:,.2f}".format(std_price)
As a reminder, we are using three features from the Boston housing dataset: 'RM'
, 'LSTAT'
, and 'PTRATIO'
. For each data point (neighborhood):
'RM'
is the average number of rooms among homes in the neighborhood.'LSTAT'
is the percentage of all Boston homeowners who have a greater net worth than homeowners in the neighborhood.'PTRATIO'
is the ratio of students to teachers in primary and secondary schools in the neighborhood.Using your intuition, for each of the three features above, do you think that an increase in the value of that feature would lead to an increase in the value of 'MDEV'
or a decrease in the value of 'MDEV'
? Justify your answer for each.
Hint: Would you expect a home that has an 'RM'
value of 6 be worth more or less than a home that has an 'RM'
value of 7?
Answer: For each of the feature, I think the MDEV will increase if
'RM'
increases, because more rooms usually means bigger houses which usually cost more money.'LSTAT'
decrease, because greater net worth of homeowners in the neighborhood means more capable of them to buy more expensive houses.'PTRATIO'
decrease, because smaller students to teachers ratio could mean that the schools have higher quality and better school district usually means more expensive houses.In this second section of the project, you will develop the tools and techniques necessary for a model to make a prediction. Being able to make accurate evaluations of each model's performance through the use of these tools and techniques helps to greatly reinforce the confidence in your predictions.
It is difficult to measure the quality of a given model without quantifying its performance over training and testing. This is typically done using some type of performance metric, whether it is through calculating some type of error, the goodness of fit, or some other useful measurement. For this project, you will be calculating the coefficient of determination, R2, to quantify your model's performance. The coefficient of determination for a model is a useful statistic in regression analysis, as it often describes how "good" that model is at making predictions.
The values for R2 range from 0 to 1, which captures the percentage of squared correlation between the predicted and actual values of the target variable. A model with an R2 of 0 always fails to predict the target variable, whereas a model with an R2 of 1 perfectly predicts the target variable. Any value between 0 and 1 indicates what percentage of the target variable, using this model, can be explained by the features. A model can be given a negative R2 as well, which indicates that the model is no better than one that naively predicts the mean of the target variable.
For the performance_metric
function in the code cell below, you will need to implement the following:
r2_score
from sklearn.metrics
to perform a performance calculation between y_true
and y_predict
.score
variable.# TODO: Import 'r2_score'
from sklearn.metrics import r2_score
def performance_metric(y_true, y_predict):
""" Calculates and returns the performance score between
true and predicted values based on the metric chosen. """
# TODO: Calculate the performance score between 'y_true' and 'y_predict'
score = r2_score(y_true, y_predict)
# Return the score
return score
Assume that a dataset contains five data points and a model made the following predictions for the target variable:
True Value | Prediction |
---|---|
3.0 | 2.5 |
-0.5 | 0.0 |
2.0 | 2.1 |
7.0 | 7.8 |
4.2 | 5.3 |
Would you consider this model to have successfully captured the variation of the target variable? Why or why not?
Run the code cell below to use the performance_metric
function and calculate this model's coefficient of determination.
# Calculate the performance of this model
score = performance_metric([3, -0.5, 2, 7, 4.2], [2.5, 0.0, 2.1, 7.8, 5.3])
print "Model has a coefficient of determination, R^2, of {:.3f}.".format(score)
Answer: This model successfully captured the variation of the target variable since R2 is 0.923 which is close to 1.
Your next implementation requires that you take the Boston housing dataset and split the data into training and testing subsets. Typically, the data is also shuffled into a random order when creating the training and testing subsets to remove any bias in the ordering of the dataset.
For the code cell below, you will need to implement the following:
train_test_split
from sklearn.cross_validation
to shuffle and split the features
and prices
data into training and testing sets.random_state
for train_test_split
to a value of your choice. This ensures results are consistent.X_train
, X_test
, y_train
, and y_test
.# TODO: Import 'train_test_split'
from sklearn.cross_validation import train_test_split
# TODO: Shuffle and split the data into training and testing subsets
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(features, prices, test_size=0.2, random_state=42)
# Success
print "Training and testing split was successful."
What is the benefit to splitting a dataset into some ratio of training and testing subsets for a learning algorithm?
Hint: What could go wrong with not having a way to test your model?
Answer: After splitting a dataset into training data and testing data, we could use train dataset to train different models and use test dataset to uniformly evaluate the performance of these models. Since the models are generated to fit training dataset and the problem of overfitting could be present, it is impossible for us to tell which model performs best according to the errors for training data. That is why we need the test dataset that we never touch during the process of model training to help us determine the general performance of the models. The model with the smallest error for test dataset usually is considered optimal.
In this third section of the project, you'll take a look at several models' learning and testing performances on various subsets of training data. Additionally, you'll investigate one particular algorithm with an increasing 'max_depth'
parameter on the full training set to observe how model complexity affects performance. Graphing your model's performance based on varying criteria can be beneficial in the analysis process, such as visualizing behavior that may not have been apparent from the results alone.
The following code cell produces four graphs for a decision tree model with different maximum depths. Each graph visualizes the learning curves of the model for both training and testing as the size of the training set is increased. Note that the shaded reigon of a learning curve denotes the uncertainty of that curve (measured as the standard deviation). The model is scored on both the training and testing sets using R2, the coefficient of determination.
Run the code cell below and use these graphs to answer the following question.
# Produce learning curves for varying training set sizes and maximum depths
vs.ModelLearning(features, prices)
Choose one of the graphs above and state the maximum depth for the model. What happens to the score of the training curve as more training points are added? What about the testing curve? Would having more training points benefit the model?
Hint: Are the learning curves converging to particular scores?
Answer: I choose max_depth = 3 graph. With more training points, the score of the training curve decreased a bit and finally converged to 0.8 while the score fo the testing curve increased dramatically and finally converged to 0.79.
More training points may not necessarily benefit the model, since when the number of data points increased to some point, the testing curve would converge and not change much more; on the other hand, the score of the training curve would decrease a bit and larger training set mean more computation time for training.
The following code cell produces a graph for a decision tree model that has been trained and validated on the training data using different maximum depths. The graph produces two complexity curves — one for training and one for validation. Similar to the learning curves, the shaded regions of both the complexity curves denote the uncertainty in those curves, and the model is scored on both the training and validation sets using the performance_metric
function.
Run the code cell below and use this graph to answer the following two questions.
vs.ModelComplexity(X_train, y_train)
When the model is trained with a maximum depth of 1, does the model suffer from high bias or from high variance? How about when the model is trained with a maximum depth of 10? What visual cues in the graph justify your conclusions?
Hint: How do you know when a model is suffering from high bias or high variance?
Answer: When the model is trained with a maximum depth of 1, it suffers from high bias, indicated from the graph that it has a small validation score(0.4). When the model is trained with a maximum depth of 10, it suffers from high variance, indicated from the graph that the blue shade of validation curve becomes wider(higher uncertainty of that curve).
Which maximum depth do you think results in a model that best generalizes to unseen data? What intuition lead you to this answer?
Answer:
The maximum depth of 3 results in the best model, since it is a sweet spot on the graph that has the highest validation score.
maximum_depth < 3 : underfitting
maximum_depth > 3: overfitting
In this final section of the project, you will construct a model and make a prediction on the client's feature set using an optimized model from fit_model
.
What is the grid search technique and how it can be applied to optimize a learning algorithm?
Answer: The grid search techinique implements an exhaustive searching through a manually specified subset of the hyperparameter space of a learning algorithm. It must be guided by some performance metric, typically measured by cross-validation on the training set or evaluation on a held-out validation set.(information from wikipedia, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperparameter_optimization)
What is the k-fold cross-validation training technique? What benefit does this technique provide for grid search when optimizing a model?
Hint: Much like the reasoning behind having a testing set, what could go wrong with using grid search without a cross-validated set?
Answer:
k-fold cross-validation explanation from http://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/cross_validation.html#cross-validation
The training set is split into k smaller sets (other approaches are described below, but generally follow the same principles). The following procedure is followed for each of the k “folds”:
Cross-validation uses all the data for training and testing, therefore, it is a much more efficient use of the available data, and it is especially useful when there is not much data available.
The performance measure reported by k-fold cross-validation is then the average of the values computed in the loop, which is a significantly better estimate than the holdout estimate.
Without cross-validation, we could easily overlook the overfitting of the data set. Cross-validation helps us better assess the model generalization.
Your final implementation requires that you bring everything together and train a model using the decision tree algorithm. To ensure that you are producing an optimized model, you will train the model using the grid search technique to optimize the 'max_depth'
parameter for the decision tree. The 'max_depth'
parameter can be thought of as how many questions the decision tree algorithm is allowed to ask about the data before making a prediction. Decision trees are part of a class of algorithms called supervised learning algorithms.
For the fit_model
function in the code cell below, you will need to implement the following:
DecisionTreeRegressor
from sklearn.tree
to create a decision tree regressor object.'regressor'
variable.'max_depth'
with the values from 1 to 10, and assign this to the 'params'
variable.make_scorer
from sklearn.metrics
to create a scoring function object.performance_metric
function as a parameter to the object.'scoring_fnc'
variable.GridSearchCV
from sklearn.grid_search
to create a grid search object.'regressor'
, 'params'
, 'scoring_fnc'
, and 'cv_sets'
as parameters to the object. GridSearchCV
object to the 'grid'
variable.# TODO: Import 'make_scorer', 'DecisionTreeRegressor', and 'GridSearchCV'
from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeRegressor
from sklearn.metrics import make_scorer
from sklearn.grid_search import GridSearchCV
def fit_model(X, y):
""" Performs grid search over the 'max_depth' parameter for a
decision tree regressor trained on the input data [X, y]. """
# Create cross-validation sets from the training data
cv_sets = ShuffleSplit(X.shape[0], n_iter = 10, test_size = 0.20, random_state = 0)
# TODO: Create a decision tree regressor object
regressor = DecisionTreeRegressor(random_state=0)
# TODO: Create a dictionary for the parameter 'max_depth' with a range from 1 to 10
params = {}
params["max_depth"] = range(1, 11)
# TODO: Transform 'performance_metric' into a scoring function using 'make_scorer'
scoring_fnc = make_scorer(performance_metric)
# TODO: Create the grid search object
grid = GridSearchCV(regressor, param_grid = params, scoring = scoring_fnc, cv=cv_sets )
# Fit the grid search object to the data to compute the optimal model
grid = grid.fit(X, y)
# Return the optimal model after fitting the data
return grid.best_estimator_
Once a model has been trained on a given set of data, it can now be used to make predictions on new sets of input data. In the case of a decision tree regressor, the model has learned what the best questions to ask about the input data are, and can respond with a prediction for the target variable. You can use these predictions to gain information about data where the value of the target variable is unknown — such as data the model was not trained on.
What maximum depth does the optimal model have? How does this result compare to your guess in Question 6?
Run the code block below to fit the decision tree regressor to the training data and produce an optimal model.
# Fit the training data to the model using grid search
reg = fit_model(X_train, y_train)
# Produce the value for 'max_depth'
print "Parameter 'max_depth' is {} for the optimal model.".format(reg.get_params()['max_depth'])
Answer: The maximum depth of the optimal model is 4. It is a little bigger than my guess in Question 6.
Imagine that you were a real estate agent in the Boston area looking to use this model to help price homes owned by your clients that they wish to sell. You have collected the following information from three of your clients:
Feature | Client 1 | Client 2 | Client 3 |
---|---|---|---|
Total number of rooms in home | 5 rooms | 4 rooms | 8 rooms |
Household net worth (income) | Top 34th percent | Bottom 45th percent | Top 7th percent |
Student-teacher ratio of nearby schools | 15-to-1 | 22-to-1 | 12-to-1 |
What price would you recommend each client sell his/her home at? Do these prices seem reasonable given the values for the respective features?
Hint: Use the statistics you calculated in the Data Exploration section to help justify your response.
Run the code block below to have your optimized model make predictions for each client's home.
# Produce a matrix for client data
client_data = [[5, 34, 15], # Client 1
[4, 55, 22], # Client 2
[8, 7, 12]] # Client 3
# Show predictions
for i, price in enumerate(reg.predict(client_data)):
print "Predicted selling price for Client {}'s home: ${:,.2f}".format(i+1, price)
Answer:
Statistics for Boston housing dataset:
Minimum price: $105,000.00
Maximum price: $1,024,800.00
Mean price: $454,342.94
Median price $438,900.00
Standard deviation of prices: $165,171.13
The predictions make sense.
Firstly, all the predictions fall in the range of (105,000, 1,024,800).
Sencondly, as I explained in Question 1, higher 'RM', smaller 'LSTAT' and smaller 'PTRATIO' could intuitively results in more expensive houses, which is also consistent with the predictions. For example, for client 3, the total number of rooms in home is 8 and the household net worth is at the top 7th percent, the predicted house price is expected to be above the average.
An optimal model is not necessarily a robust model. Sometimes, a model is either too complex or too simple to sufficiently generalize to new data. Sometimes, a model could use a learning algorithm that is not appropriate for the structure of the data given. Other times, the data itself could be too noisy or contain too few samples to allow a model to adequately capture the target variable — i.e., the model is underfitted. Run the code cell below to run the fit_model
function ten times with different training and testing sets to see how the prediction for a specific client changes with the data it's trained on.
vs.PredictTrials(features, prices, fit_model, client_data)
In a few sentences, discuss whether the constructed model should or should not be used in a real-world setting.
Hint: Some questions to answering:
Answer:
I think the constructed model should note be used in a real-world setting for the several reasons: