Feature Selection in Nonlinear Kernel Classification
Download
Report
Transcript Feature Selection in Nonlinear Kernel Classification
Feature Selection in Nonlinear
Kernel Classification
Workshop on Optimization-Based Data Mining Techniques with Applications
IEEE International Conference on Data Mining
Omaha, Nebraska, October 28, 2007
Olvi Mangasarian & Edward Wild
University of Wisconsin
Madison
However, data is
nonlinearly separable
using only the feature x2
Best linear classifier that
uses only 1 feature selects
the feature x1
Example
x2
+ + +
+ + +
_
_
Data is nonlinearly
separable: In general
nonlinear kernels use
both x1 and x2
+
+
_ _ _
_ _ _
+ ++ +
+ + + +
x1
Feature selection in nonlinear classification is important
Outline
Minimize the number of input space features selected by a
nonlinear kernel classifier
Start with a standard 1-norm nonlinear support vector
machine (SVM)
Add 0-1 diagonal matrix to suppress or keep features
Leads to a nonlinear mixed-integer program
Introduce algorithm to obtain a good local solution to the
resulting mixed-integer program
Evaluate algorithm on two public datasets from the UCI
repository and synthetic NDCC data
Linear kernel: (K(A, B))ij = (AB)ij = AiB j = K(Ai, B j)
¢
¢
kernel, parameter
:(K(A, B)) = exp(-||A -B || )
SupportGaussian
Vector
SVMs
Machines
¢
x 2 Rn
SVM defined by
parameters u and threshold
of the nonlinear surface
A contains all data points
{+…+} ½ A+
{…} ½ A
e is a vector of ones
K(A, A0)u· e e
ij
_
__
0
j
2
K(A+, A0)u ¸ e +e
+
++
_
_
i
+
+
+
+ +
+ ++
Minimize e y (hinge loss or plus
_
+ + +
Minimize e s (||u|| at+
function or max{•, 0}) to fit _
+
solution)
__to reduce +
data
K(x , A )u =
overfitting
+
_
_
K(x , A )u =
_
__
_
Slack variable y ¸ 0
_
_
_ K(x , A )u = 1
_
allows points
to be on the
_
wrong side of the
_
_
bounding surface _
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
To suppress features, add the number of
features present (e0Ee) to the objective with
weight ¸ 0
As is increased, more features will be
removed from the classifier
Reduced
Start with
Feature
Full SVM
SVM
Replace A with AE, where
E is a diagonal n £ n
matrix
Eii 2 {1,
0},present in
All with
features
are
i =the
1, …,
n
kernel
matrix K(A, A0)
If Eii is 0 the ith feature is removed
Reduced Feature SVM (RFSVM)
1) Initialize diagonal matrix E randomly
2) For fixed 0-1 values E, solve the SVM linear program
to obtain (u, , y, s)
3)Fix (u, , s) and sweep through E repeatedly as follows:
For each component of E replace 1 by 0 and conversely
provided the change decreases the overall objective function
by more than tol
4)Go to (3) if a change was made in the last sweep,
otherwise continue to (5)
5)Solve the SVM linear program with the new matrix E.
If the objective decrease is less than tol, stop, otherwise
go to (3)
RFSVM Convergence
(for tol = 0)
Objective function value converges
Each step decreases the objective
Objective is bounded below by 0
Limit of the objective function value is attained at
any accumulation point of the sequence of iterates
Accumulation point is a “local minimum solution”
Continuous variables are optimal for the fixed integer
variables
Changing any single integer variable will not decrease
the objective
Experimental Results
Classification accuracy versus number of features used
Compare our RFSVM to Relief and RFE
(Recursive Feature Elimination)
Results given on two public datasets from the UCI
repository
Ability of RFSVM to handle problems with up to 1000
features tested on synthetic NDCC datasets
Set feature selection parameter = 1
Relief and RFE
Relief
Kira and Rendell, 1992
Filter method: feature selection is a preprocessing procedure
Features are selected as relevant if they tend to have different
feature values for points in different classes
RFE (Recursive Feature Elimination)
Guyon, Weston, Barnhill, and Vapnik, 2002
Wrapper method: feature selection is based on classification
Features are selected as relevant if removing them causes a large
change in the margin of an SVM
Ionosphere Dataset
34
SVM with
351 Points in RNonlinear
Cross-validation accuracy
If the appropriate value
of is selected,
RFSVM can obtain
higher accuracy using
fewer features than
SVM1
no feature selection
Even for feature selection
= 0, some
Note that parameter
accuracy decreases
features
be removed
slightly until
aboutmay
10 features
when
remain, and
thenremoving
decreasesthem
more
the hinge loss
sharply
asdecreases
they are removed
Linear 1-norm
SVM
Number of features used
Points are generated
from normal
distributions
centered at vertices
of 1-norm cubes
Dataset is not
linearly separable
Normally Distributed Clusters on
Cubes Dataset (Thompson, 2006)
Each
point is vs.
the SVM without Feature Selection (NKSVM1)
RFSVM
average
ontest
NDCC
onsetNDCC
DataData
withwith
20 True
100 True
Features
Features
and Varying
and
correctness over Numbers
1000 Irrelevant
of Irrelevant
Features
Features
10 datasets with
200 training, 200
tuning, and 1000
When 480
testing points
irrelevant
Average Accuracy on 1000 Test Points features are
added, the
0.70
RFSVM
accuracy of
RFSVM is
0.53
NKSVM1
45% higher
than that of
NKSVM1
Conclusion
New rigorous formulation with precise objective
for feature selection in nonlinear SVM classifiers
Obtain a local solution to the resulting mixed-integer
program
Alternate between a linear program to compute
continuous variables and successive sweeps to update
the integer variables
Efficiently learns accurate nonlinear classifiers
with reduced numbers of features
Handles problems with 1000 features, 900 of
which are irrelevant
Questions?
Websites with links to papers and talks
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~olvi
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~wildt
NDCC generator
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/dmi/svm/ndcc/
Running Time on the Ionosphere
Dataset
Averages 5.7 sweeps through the integer variables
Averages 3.4 linear programs
75% of the time consumed in objective function
evaluations
15% of time consumed in solving linear programs
Complete experiment (1960 runs) took 1 hour
3 GHz Pentium 4
Written in MATLAB
CPLEX 9.0 used to solve the linear programs
Gaussian kernel written in C
Sonar Dataset
208 Points in R60
Cross-validation accuracy
Number of features used
Related Work
Approaches that use specialized kernels
Weston, Mukherjee, Chapelle, Pontil, Poggio, and
Vapnik, 2000: structural risk minimization
Gold, Holub, and Sollich, 2005: Bayesian interpretation
Zhang, 2006: smoothing spline ANOVA kernels
Margin-based approach
Frölich and Zell, 2004: remove features if there is little
change to the margin if they are removed
Other approaches which combine feature selection
with basis reduction
Bi, Bennett, Embrechts, Breneman, and Song, 2003
Avidan, 2004
Future Work
Datasets with more features
Reduce the number of objective function
evaluations
Limit the number of integer cycles
Other ways to update the integer variables
Application to regression problems
Automatic choice of
Algorithm
Global solution to nonlinear mixed-integer program cannot
be found efficiently
Requires solving 2n linear programs
For fixed values of the integer diagonal matrix, the
problem is reduced to an ordinary SVM linear program
Solution strategy: alternate optimization of continuous and
integer variables:
For fixed values of E, solve a linear program for
(u, , y, s)
For fixed values of (u, , s), sweep through the components of E
and make updates which decrease the objective function
Notation
Data points represented as rows of an m £ n matrix A
Data labels of +1 or -1 are given as elements of an
m £ m diagonal matrix D
Example
XOR: 4 points in R2
Points (0, 1) , (1, 0) have label +1
Points (0, 0) , (1, 1) have label 1
Kernel K(A, B) : Rm£n £ Rn£k ! Rm£k
Linear kernel: (K(A, B))ij = (AB)ij = AiB¢j = K(Ai, B¢j)
Gaussian kernel, parameter :(K(A, B))ij = exp(-||Ai0 - B¢j||2)
Methodology
UCI Datasets
To reduce running time, 1/11 of each dataset was used as a
tuning set to select and the kernel parameter
Remaining 10/11 used for 10-fold cross validation
Procedure repeated 5 times for each dataset with different
random choice of tuning set each time
NDCC
Generate multiple datasets with 200 training, 200 tuning, and
1000 testing points