Bayesian Treatment of Incomplete Bayesian Treatment of Incomplete Discrete Data applied to Mutual Discrete Data applied to Mutual Information and Feature Selection Information and Feature Selection Marcus Hutter Marcus Hutter & Marco Zaffalon & Marco Zaffalon IDSIA IDSIA Galleria 2, 6928 Manno (Lugano), Switzerland Galleria 2, 6928 Manno (Lugano), Switzerland www.idsia.ch/~{marcus,zaffalon} www.idsia.ch/~{marcus,zaffalon} {marcus,zaffalon}@idsia.ch {marcus,zaffalon}@idsia.ch
16
Embed
Bayesian Treatment of Incomplete Discrete Data applied to Mutual Information and Feature Selection Marcus Hutter & Marco Zaffalon IDSIA IDSIA Galleria.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Bayesian Treatment of Incomplete Bayesian Treatment of Incomplete Discrete Data applied to Mutual Discrete Data applied to Mutual Information and Feature SelectionInformation and Feature Selection
Marcus HutterMarcus Hutter & Marco Zaffalon & Marco Zaffalon
Given the joint chances of a pair of random variables one can compute quantities of interest, like the mutual information. The Bayesian treatment of unknown chances involves computing, from a second order prior distribution and the data likelihood, a posterior distribution of the chances. A common treatment of incomplete data is to assume ignorability and determine the chances by the expectation maximization (EM) algorithm. The two different methods above are well established but typically separated. This paper joins the two approaches in the case of Dirichlet priors, and derives efficient approximations for the mean, mode and the (co)variance of the chances and the mutual information. Furthermore, we prove the unimodality of the posterior distribution, whence the important property of convergence of EM to the global maximum in the chosen framework. These results are applied to the problem of selecting features for incremental learning and naive Bayes classification. A fast filter based on the distribution of mutual information is shown to outperform the traditional filter based on empirical mutual information on a number of incomplete real data sets.
Incomplete data, Bayesian statistics, expectation maximization, global optimization, Mutual Information, Cross Entropy, Dirichlet distribution, Second order distribution, Credible intervals, expectation and variance of mutual information, missing data, Robust feature selection, Filter approach, naive Bayes classifier.
KeywordsKeywords
Mutual Information (MI)Mutual Information (MI)
Consider two discrete random variables (Consider two discrete random variables (,,))
(In)Dependence often measured by MI(In)Dependence often measured by MI
– Also known as Also known as cross-entropycross-entropy or or information gaininformation gain– ExamplesExamples
Inference of Bayesian nets, classification treesInference of Bayesian nets, classification trees Selection of relevant variables for the task at handSelection of relevant variables for the task at hand
ClassificationClassification– Predicting the Predicting the classclass value given values of value given values of featuresfeatures– Features (or attributes) and class = random variablesFeatures (or attributes) and class = random variables– Learning the rule ‘features Learning the rule ‘features class’ from data class’ from data
Filters goal: removing irrelevant featuresFilters goal: removing irrelevant features– More accurate predictions, easier modelsMore accurate predictions, easier models
MI-based approachMI-based approach– Remove feature Remove feature if class if class does not depend on it: does not depend on it:– Or: remove Or: remove if if
is an arbitrary threshold of relevanceis an arbitrary threshold of relevance
0πI
πI
Empirical Mutual InformationEmpirical Mutual Informationa common way to use MI in practicea common way to use MI in practice
Data ( ) Data ( ) contingency table contingency table
Problems of the empirical approachProblems of the empirical approach– due to random fluctuations? (finite sample)due to random fluctuations? (finite sample)– How to know if it is reliable, e.g. by How to know if it is reliable, e.g. by
jj\\ii 11 22 …… rr
11 nn1111 nn1212 …… nn1r1r
22 nn2121 nn2222 …… nn2r2r
ss nns1s1 nns2s2 …… nnsrsr
occurred times of# i,jnij
occurred times of# i nnj iji
occurred times of# j nni ijj
sizedataset ij ijnn
nnijij ̂ π̂I
0ˆ πI
?nIP
n
Incomplete SamplesIncomplete Samples
Missing features/classesMissing features/classes– Missing class: (i,?) Missing class: (i,?) n ni?i? = # features i with missing class = # features i with missing class
labellabel
– Missing feature: (?,j) Missing feature: (?,j) n n?j?j = # classes j with missing = # classes j with missing featurefeature
– Total sample size NTotal sample size Nijij=n=nijij+n+ni?i?+n+n?j?j
MAR assumption: MAR assumption: i?i?==i+ i+ , , ?j?j==+j+j
– General case: missing features and classGeneral case: missing features and class EM + closed-form leading order in NEM + closed-form leading order in N-1-1 expressions expressions
– Missing features onlyMissing features only Closed-form leading order expressions for Mean and VarianceClosed-form leading order expressions for Mean and Variance Complexity Complexity OO((rsrs))
We Need the Distribution of MIWe Need the Distribution of MI
Bayesian approachBayesian approach– Prior distribution for the unknown chances Prior distribution for the unknown chances
Collected measures for each filterCollected measures for each filter– Average # of correct predictions (prediction accuracy)Average # of correct predictions (prediction accuracy)– Average # of features usedAverage # of features used
Naive Bayes
Classification
Test
in
stance
Filter
Inst
ance
k
Inst
ance
k+
1
Inst
ance
N
Learningdata
Store after
classi
ficatio
n
Results on 10 Complete DatasetsResults on 10 Complete Datasets
# of used features# of used features
Accuracies NOT significantly differentAccuracies NOT significantly different– Except Chess & Spam with FFExcept Chess & Spam with FF
# Instances # Features Dataset FF F BF690 36 Australian 32.6 34.3 35.9
Results on 5 Incomplete Data SetsResults on 5 Incomplete Data Sets
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Aud
iolo
gy Crx
Hor
se-C
olic
Hyp
othy
roid
loss
Soyb
ean-
larg
e
FF
F
BF
Percentages of used features
0.9
0.92
0.94
0.96
0.98
1
0
30
0
60
0
90
0
12
00
15
00
18
00
21
00
24
00
27
00
30
00
Instance number
Pre
dic
tio
n a
cc
ura
cy
(H
yp
oth
yro
idlo
ss)
F
FF
# Instances # Features # miss.vals Dataset FF F BF
226 69 317 Audiology 64.3 68.0 68.7
690 15 67 Crx 9.7 12.6 13.8
368 18 1281 Horse-Colic 11.8 16.1 17.4
3163 23 1980 Hypothyroidloss 4.3 8.3 13.2
683 35 2337 Soybean-large 34.2 35.0 35.0
ConclusionsConclusions
Expressions for several moments of Expressions for several moments of and MI and MI distribution even for incomplete categorical datadistribution even for incomplete categorical data– The distribution can be approximated wellThe distribution can be approximated well– Safer inferences, same computational complexity of Safer inferences, same computational complexity of
empirical MIempirical MI– Why not to use it?Why not to use it?
Robust feature selection shows power of MI Robust feature selection shows power of MI distributiondistribution– FF outperforms traditional filter FFF outperforms traditional filter F
Many useful applications possibleMany useful applications possible– Inference of Bayesian netsInference of Bayesian nets– Inference of classification treesInference of classification trees– ……