# We are going to look at how iterating too much might generate observation instability. # Obviously, we are in a controlled environment, without issues (real rules). # Do not do this in a real scenario. # First, we load our libraries library(lightgbm) library(ggplot2) # Second, we load our data data(agaricus.train, package = "lightgbm") train <- agaricus.train dtrain <- lgb.Dataset(train$data, label = train$label) data(agaricus.test, package = "lightgbm") test <- agaricus.test dtest <- lgb.Dataset.create.valid(dtrain, test$data, label = test$label) # Third, we setup parameters and we train a model params <- list(objective = "regression", metric = "l2") valids <- list(test = dtest) model <- lgb.train( params , dtrain , 50 , valids , min_data = 1 , learning_rate = 0.1 , bagging_fraction = 0.1 , bagging_freq = 1 , bagging_seed = 1 ) # We create a data.frame with the following structure: # X = average leaf of the observation throughout all trees # Y = prediction probability (clamped to [1e-15, 1-1e-15]) # Z = logloss # binned = binned quantile of average leaf new_data <- data.frame( X = rowMeans(predict( model , agaricus.test$data , predleaf = TRUE )) , Y = pmin( pmax( predict(model, agaricus.test$data) , 1e-15 ) , 1 - 1e-15 ) ) new_data$Z <- -1 * (agaricus.test$label * log(new_data$Y) + (1 - agaricus.test$label) * log(1 - new_data$Y)) new_data$binned <- .bincode( x = new_data$X , breaks = quantile( x = new_data$X , probs = (1:9) / 10 ) , right = TRUE , include.lowest = TRUE ) new_data$binned[is.na(new_data$binned)] <- 0 new_data$binned <- as.factor(new_data$binned) # We can check the binned content table(new_data$binned) # We can plot the binned content # On the second plot, we clearly notice the lower the bin (the lower the leaf value), the higher the loss # On the third plot, it is smooth! ggplot( data = new_data , mapping = aes(x = X, y = Y, color = binned) ) + geom_point() + theme_bw() + labs(title = "Prediction Depth", x = "Leaf Bin", y = "Prediction Probability") ggplot( data = new_data , mapping = aes(x = binned, y = Z, fill = binned, group = binned) ) + geom_boxplot() + theme_bw() + labs(title = "Prediction Depth Spread", x = "Leaf Bin", y = "Logloss") ggplot( data = new_data , mapping = aes(x = Y, y = ..count.., fill = binned) ) + geom_density(position = "fill") + theme_bw() + labs(title = "Depth Density", x = "Prediction Probability", y = "Bin Density") # Now, let's show with other parameters model2 <- lgb.train( params , dtrain , 100 , valids , min_data = 1 , learning_rate = 1 ) # We create the data structure, but for model2 new_data2 <- data.frame( X = rowMeans(predict( model2 , agaricus.test$data , predleaf = TRUE )) , Y = pmin( pmax( predict( model2 , agaricus.test$data ) , 1e-15 ) , 1 - 1e-15 ) ) new_data2$Z <- -1 * (agaricus.test$label * log(new_data2$Y) + (1 - agaricus.test$label) * log(1 - new_data2$Y)) new_data2$binned <- .bincode( x = new_data2$X , breaks = quantile( x = new_data2$X , probs = (1:9) / 10 ) , right = TRUE , include.lowest = TRUE ) new_data2$binned[is.na(new_data2$binned)] <- 0 new_data2$binned <- as.factor(new_data2$binned) # We can check the binned content table(new_data2$binned) # We can plot the binned content # On the second plot, we clearly notice the lower the bin (the lower the leaf value), the higher the loss # On the third plot, it is clearly not smooth! We are severely overfitting the data, but the rules are real thus it is not an issue # However, if the rules were not true, the loss would explode. ggplot( data = new_data2 , mapping = aes(x = X, y = Y, color = binned) ) + geom_point() + theme_bw() + labs(title = "Prediction Depth", x = "Leaf Bin", y = "Prediction Probability") ggplot( data = new_data2 , mapping = aes(x = binned, y = Z, fill = binned, group = binned) ) + geom_boxplot() + theme_bw() + labs(title = "Prediction Depth Spread", x = "Leaf Bin", y = "Logloss") ggplot( data = new_data2 , mapping = aes(x = Y, y = ..count.., fill = binned) ) + geom_density(position = "fill") + theme_bw() + labs(title = "Depth Density", x = "Prediction Probability", y = "Bin Density") # Now, try with very severe overfitting model3 <- lgb.train( params , dtrain , 1000 , valids , min_data = 1 , learning_rate = 1 ) # We create the data structure, but for model3 new_data3 <- data.frame( X = rowMeans(predict( model3 , agaricus.test$data , predleaf = TRUE )) , Y = pmin( pmax( predict( model3 , agaricus.test$data ) , 1e-15 ) , 1 - 1e-15 ) ) new_data3$Z <- -1 * (agaricus.test$label * log(new_data3$Y) + (1 - agaricus.test$label) * log(1 - new_data3$Y)) new_data3$binned <- .bincode( x = new_data3$X , breaks = quantile( x = new_data3$X , probs = (1:9) / 10 ) , right = TRUE , include.lowest = TRUE ) new_data3$binned[is.na(new_data3$binned)] <- 0 new_data3$binned <- as.factor(new_data3$binned) # We can check the binned content table(new_data3$binned) # We can plot the binned content # On the third plot, it is clearly not smooth! We are severely overfitting the data, but the rules # are real thus it is not an issue. # However, if the rules were not true, the loss would explode. See the sudden spikes? ggplot( data = new_data3 , mapping = aes(x = Y, y = ..count.., fill = binned) ) + geom_density(position = "fill") + theme_bw() + labs(title = "Depth Density", x = "Prediction Probability", y = "Bin Density") # Compare with our second model, the difference is severe. This is smooth. ggplot( data = new_data2 , mapping = aes(x = Y, y = ..count.., fill = binned) ) + geom_density(position = "fill") + theme_bw() + labs(title = "Depth Density", x = "Prediction Probability", y = "Bin Density")