Sometimes you have to write parameterized or re-usable code.
The methods for doing this should be easy and legible.
The first point feels abstract, until you find yourself wanting to re-use code on new projects. As for the second point: I feel the wrapr package is the easiest, safest, most consistent, and most legible way to achieve maintainable code re-use in R.
In this article we will show how wrapr makes code-rewriting even easier with its new let x=x automation.
As part of our consulting practice Win-Vector LLC has been helping a few clients stand-up advanced analytics and machine learning stacks using R and substantial data stores (such as relational database variants such as PostgreSQL or big data systems such as Spark).
Often we come to a point where we or a partner realize: "the design would be a whole lot easier if we could phrase it in terms of higher order data operators."
Dr. Nina Zumel will be presenting “Myths of Data Science: Things you Should and Should Not Believe”,
Sunday, October 29, 2017
10:00 AM to 12:30 PM at the She Talks Data Meetup (Bay Area).
ODSC West 2017 is soon. It is our favorite conference and we will be giving both a workshop and a talk.
Thursday Nov 2 2017,
“Modeling big data with R, Sparklyr, and Apache Spark”,
Workshop/Training intermediate, 4 hours,
by Dr. John Mount (link).
Friday Nov 3 2017,
“Myths of Data Science: Things you Should and Should Not Believe”,
Data Science lecture beginner/intermediate, 45 minutes,
by Dr. Nina Zumel (link, length, abstract, and title to be corrected).
We really hope you can make these talks.
On the “R for big data” front we have some big news: the replyr package now implements pivot/un-pivot (or what tidyr calls spread/gather) for big data (databases and Sparklyr). This data shaping ability adds a lot of user power. We call the theory “coordinatized data” and the work practice “fluid data”.
In a previous article, we showed the use of partial pooling, or hierarchical/multilevel models, for level coding high-cardinality categorical variables in vtreat. In this article, we will discuss a little more about the how and why of partial pooling in R.
We will use the lme4 package to fit the hierarchical models. The acronym “lme” stands for “linear mixed-effects” models: models that combine so-called “fixed effects” and “random effects” in a single (generalized) linear model. The lme4 documentation uses the random/fixed effects terminology, but we are going to follow Gelman and Hill, and avoid the use of the terms “fixed” and “random” effects.
The varying coefficients [corresponding to the levels of a categorical variable] in a multilevel model are sometimes called random effects, a term that refers to the randomness in the probability model for the group-level coefficients….
The term fixed effects is used in contrast to random effects – but not in a consistent way! … Because of the conflicting definitions and advice, we will avoid the terms “fixed” and “random” entirely, and focus on the description of the model itself…
– Gelman and Hill 2007, Chapter 11.4
We will also restrict ourselves to the case that vtreat considers: partially pooled estimates of conditional group expectations, with no other predictors considered.
One of the services that the R package vtreat provides is level coding (what we sometimes call impact coding): converting the levels of a categorical variable to a meaningful and concise single numeric variable, rather than coding them as indicator variables (AKA "one-hot encoding"). Level coding can be computationally and statistically preferable to one-hot encoding for variables that have an extremely large number of possible levels.
By default, vtreat level codes to the difference between the conditional means and the grand mean (catN variables) when the outcome is numeric, and to the difference between the conditional log-likelihood and global log-likelihood of the target class (catB variables) when the outcome is categorical. These aren’t the only possible level codings. For example, the ranger package can encode categorical variables as ordinals, sorted by the conditional expectations/means. While this is not a completely faithful encoding for all possible models (it is not completely faithful for linear or logistic regression, for example), it is often invertible for tree-based methods, and has the advantage of keeping the original levels distinct, which impact coding may not. That is, two levels with the same conditional expectation would be conflated by vtreat‘s coding. This often isn’t a problem — but sometimes, it may be.
So the data scientist may want to use a level coding different from what vtreat defaults to. In this article, we will demonstrate how to implement custom level encoders in vtreat. We assume you are familiar with the basics of vtreat: the types of derived variables, how to create and apply a treatment plan, etc.