Binary Classifier for photo detection
$begingroup$
Two training sets are involved, one complete, one with missing feature data as well. The data consists of CNNs and GIST features.
For the normalising, I have MinMax Scaler feature. I have cleaned up the missing data by using the mean of the column because I tried the mean by row but this bring down the accuracy of the classifier further down. I am assuming that this because the average of all the features for the specific photo doesn't calculate well.
I then concatenated both the datasets. Is calling the fit method twice incrementally better?
Classifier Results
- low accuracy (70%)
Log loss is 9
precision recall f1-score support
0.0 0.67 0.56 0.61 431
1.0 0.72 0.80 0.76 605
micro avg 0.70 0.70 0.70 1036
macro avg 0.69 0.68 0.68 1036
weighted avg 0.70 0.70 0.70 1036
I also have tried multiple train-test splits, I achieve the best accuracy at 0.6 train.
I understand this is a broad question.
I have tried both logistic regression with saga and liblinear. SVM with rbf too. But still unable to increase the accuracy of my classifier.
I plotted my training set data of one feature from both classes and the data appears to be non linearly separable? As in the data from 1 and the data point from 2 appears to be all over. I am not sure how else I can do this?
Also how can I attach confidence of the training data into my classifier? As In I have the confidence for each record of data. ID 1 - 0.2, ID 2 - 0.4 and so on..
I am new to the subject, apologies if any of it sounds dumb.
machine-learning python classification scikit-learn
asked 8 mins ago
Will Will
1
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Two training sets are involved, one complete, one with missing feature data as well. The data consists of CNNs and GIST features.
For the normalising, I have MinMax Scaler feature. I have cleaned up the missing data by using the mean of the column because I tried the mean by row but this bring down the accuracy of the classifier further down. I am assuming that this because the average of all the features for the specific photo doesn't calculate well.
I then concatenated both the datasets. Is calling the fit method twice incrementally better?
Classifier Results
- low accuracy (70%)
Log loss is 9
precision recall f1-score support
0.0 0.67 0.56 0.61 431
1.0 0.72 0.80 0.76 605
micro avg 0.70 0.70 0.70 1036
macro avg 0.69 0.68 0.68 1036
weighted avg 0.70 0.70 0.70 1036
I also have tried multiple train-test splits, I achieve the best accuracy at 0.6 train.
I understand this is a broad question.
I have tried both logistic regression with saga and liblinear. SVM with rbf too. But still unable to increase the accuracy of my classifier.
I plotted my training set data of one feature from both classes and the data appears to be non linearly separable? As in the data from 1 and the data point from 2 appears to be all over. I am not sure how else I can do this?
Also how can I attach confidence of the training data into my classifier? As In I have the confidence for each record of data. ID 1 - 0.2, ID 2 - 0.4 and so on..
I am new to the subject, apologies if any of it sounds dumb.
machine-learning python classification scikit-learn
asked 8 mins ago
Will Will
1
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Two training sets are involved, one complete, one with missing feature data as well. The data consists of CNNs and GIST features.
For the normalising, I have MinMax Scaler feature. I have cleaned up the missing data by using the mean of the column because I tried the mean by row but this bring down the accuracy of the classifier further down. I am assuming that this because the average of all the features for the specific photo doesn't calculate well.
I then concatenated both the datasets. Is calling the fit method twice incrementally better?
Classifier Results
- low accuracy (70%)
Log loss is 9
precision recall f1-score support
0.0 0.67 0.56 0.61 431
1.0 0.72 0.80 0.76 605
micro avg 0.70 0.70 0.70 1036
macro avg 0.69 0.68 0.68 1036
weighted avg 0.70 0.70 0.70 1036
I also have tried multiple train-test splits, I achieve the best accuracy at 0.6 train.
I understand this is a broad question.
I have tried both logistic regression with saga and liblinear. SVM with rbf too. But still unable to increase the accuracy of my classifier.
I plotted my training set data of one feature from both classes and the data appears to be non linearly separable? As in the data from 1 and the data point from 2 appears to be all over. I am not sure how else I can do this?
Also how can I attach confidence of the training data into my classifier? As In I have the confidence for each record of data. ID 1 - 0.2, ID 2 - 0.4 and so on..
I am new to the subject, apologies if any of it sounds dumb.
machine-learning python classification scikit-learn
asked 8 mins ago
Will Will
1
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
Two training sets are involved, one complete, one with missing feature data as well. The data consists of CNNs and GIST features.
For the normalising, I have MinMax Scaler feature. I have cleaned up the missing data by using the mean of the column because I tried the mean by row but this bring down the accuracy of the classifier further down. I am assuming that this because the average of all the features for the specific photo doesn't calculate well.
I then concatenated both the datasets. Is calling the fit method twice incrementally better?
Classifier Results
- low accuracy (70%)
Log loss is 9
precision recall f1-score support
0.0 0.67 0.56 0.61 431
1.0 0.72 0.80 0.76 605
micro avg 0.70 0.70 0.70 1036
macro avg 0.69 0.68 0.68 1036
weighted avg 0.70 0.70 0.70 1036
I also have tried multiple train-test splits, I achieve the best accuracy at 0.6 train.
I understand this is a broad question.
I have tried both logistic regression with saga and liblinear. SVM with rbf too. But still unable to increase the accuracy of my classifier.
I plotted my training set data of one feature from both classes and the data appears to be non linearly separable? As in the data from 1 and the data point from 2 appears to be all over. I am not sure how else I can do this?
Also how can I attach confidence of the training data into my classifier? As In I have the confidence for each record of data. ID 1 - 0.2, ID 2 - 0.4 and so on..
I am new to the subject, apologies if any of it sounds dumb.
machine-learning python classification scikit-learn
machine-learning python classification scikit-learn
asked 8 mins ago
Will Will
1
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 8 mins ago
Will Will
1
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 8 mins ago
Will Will
1
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 8 mins ago
Will Will
1
asked 8 mins ago
Will Will
1
1
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "557"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Will is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdatascience.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f48116%2fbinary-classifier-for-photo-detection%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Will is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Will is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Will is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Will is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Data Science Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdatascience.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f48116%2fbinary-classifier-for-photo-detection%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
