* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download P(x | i )
Survey
Document related concepts
Transcript
Bayesian Decision Theory (Sections 2.1-2.2) • Decision problem posed in probabilistic terms • Bayesian Decision Theory–Continuous Features • All the relevant probability values are known Probability Density Jain CSE 802, Spring 2013 Course Outline MODEL INFORMATION COMPLETE Bayes Decision Theory Parametric Approach “Optimal” Rules Plug-in Rules INCOMPLETE Supervised Learning Nonparametric Approach Unsupervised Learning Parametric Approach Density Geometric Rules Estimation (K-NN, MLP) Mixture Resolving Nonparametric Approach Cluster Analysis (Hard, Fuzzy) Introduction • From sea bass vs. salmon example to “abstract” decision making problem • State of nature; a priori (prior) probability • State of nature (which type of fish will be observed next) is unpredictable, so it is a random variable • The catch of salmon and sea bass is equiprobable • P(1) = P(2) (uniform priors) • P(1) + P( 2) = 1 (exclusivity and exhaustivity) • Prior prob. reflects our prior knowledge about how likely we are to observe a sea bass or salmon; these probabilities may depend on time of the year or the fishing area! • Bayes decision rule with only the prior information • Decide 1 if P(1) > P(2), otherwise decide 2 • Error rate = Min {P(1) , P(2)} • Suppose now we have a measurement or feature • • on the state of nature - say the fish lightness value Use of the class-conditional probability density P(x | 1) and P(x | 2) describe the difference in lightness feature between populations of sea bass and salmon Amount of overlap between the densities determines the “goodness” of feature • Maximum likelihood decision rule • Assign input pattern x to class 1 if P(x | 1) > P(x | 2), otherwise 2 • How does the feature x influence our attitude (prior) concerning the true state of nature? • Bayes decision rule • Posteriori probability, likelihood, evidence • P(j , x) = P(j | x)p (x) = p(x | j) P (j) • Bayes formula P(j | x) = {p(x | j) . P (j)} / p(x) j2 where P ( x ) P ( x | j )P ( j ) j 1 • Posterior = (Likelihood. Prior) / Evidence • Evidence P(x) can be viewed as a scale factor that • guarantees that the posterior probabilities sum to 1 P(x | j) is called the likelihood of j with respect to x; the category j for which P(x | j) is large is more likely to be the true category • • P(1 | x) is the probability of the state of nature being 1 given that feature value x has been observed Decision based on the posterior probabilities is called the Optimal Bayes Decision rule For a given observation (feature value) X: if P(1 | x) > P(2 | x) if P(1 | x) < P(2 | x) decide 1 decide 2 To justify the above rule, calculate the probability of error: P(error | x) = P(1 | x) if we decide 2 P(error | x) = P(2 | x) if we decide 1 • So, for a given x, we can minimize te rob. Of error, decide 1 if P(1 | x) > P(2 | x); otherwise decide 2 Therefore: P(error | x) = min [P(1 | x), P(2 | x)] • Thus, for each observation x, Bayes decision rule • minimizes the probability of error Unconditional error: P(error) obtained by integration over all x w.r.t. p(x) • Optimal Bayes decision rule Decide 1 if P(1 | x) > P(2 | x); otherwise decide 2 • Special cases: (i) P(1) = P(2); Decide 1 if p(x | 1) > p(x | 2), otherwise 2 (ii) p(x | 1) = p(x | 2); Decide 1 if P(1) > P(2), otherwise 2 Bayesian Decision Theory – Continuous Features • Generalization of the preceding formulation • Use of more than one feature (d features) • Use of more than two states of nature (c classes) • Allowing other actions besides deciding on the state of • nature Introduce a loss function which is more general than the probability of error • Allowing actions other than classification primarily allows the possibility of rejection • Refusing to make a decision when it is difficult to decide between two classes or in noisy cases! • The loss function specifies the cost of each action • Let {1, 2,…, c} be the set of c states of nature (or “categories”) • Let {1, 2,…, a} be the set of a possible actions • Let (i | j) be the loss incurred for taking action i when the true state of nature is j • General decision rule (x) specifies which action to take for every possible observation x j c Conditional Risk R( i | x ) ( i | j )P ( j | x ) j 1 For a given x, suppose we take the action i ; if the true state is j , we will incur the loss (i | j). P(j | x) is the prob. that the true state is j But, any one of the C states is possible for given x. Overall risk R = Expected value of R(i | x) w.r.t. p(x) Conditional risk Minimizing R Minimize R(i | x) for i = 1,…, a Select the action i for which R(i | x) is minimum The overall risk R is minimized and the resulting risk is called the Bayes risk; it is the best performance that can be achieved! • Two-category classification 1 : deciding 1 2 : deciding 2 ij = (i | j) loss incurred for deciding i when the true state of nature is j Conditional risk: R(1 | x) = 11P(1 | x) + 12P(2 | x) R(2 | x) = 21P(1 | x) + 22P(2 | x) Bayes decision rule is stated as: if R(1 | x) < R(2 | x) Take action 1: “decide 1” This results in the equivalent rule: decide 1 if: (21- 11) P(x | 1) P(1) > (12- 22) P(x | 2) P(2) and decide 2 otherwise Likelihood ratio: The preceding rule is equivalent to the following rule: P ( x | 1 ) 12 22 P ( 2 ) if . P ( x | 2 ) 21 11 P ( 1 ) then take action 1 (decide 1); otherwise take action 2 (decide 2) Note that the posteriori porbabilities are scaled by the loss differences. Interpretation of the Bayes decision rule: “If the likelihood ratio of class 1 and class 2 exceeds a threshold value (that is independent of the input pattern x), the optimal action is to decide 1” Maximum likelihood decision rule: the threshold value is 1; 0-1 loss function and equal class prior probability Bayesian Decision Theory (Sections 2.3-2.5) • Minimum Error Rate Classification • Classifiers, Discriminant Functions and Decision Surfaces • The Normal Density Minimum Error Rate Classification • Actions are decisions on classes If action i is taken and the true state of nature is j then: the decision is correct if i = j and in error if i j • Seek a decision rule that minimizes the probability of error or the error rate • Zero-one (0-1) loss function: no loss for correct decision and a unit loss for any error 0 i j ( i , j ) 1 i j i , j 1 ,..., c The conditional risk can now be simplified as: j c R( i | x ) ( i | j )P ( j | x ) j 1 P( j | x ) 1 P( i | x ) j 1 “The risk corresponding to the 0-1 loss function is the average probability of error” • Minimizing the risk requires maximizing the posterior probability P(i | x) since R(i | x) = 1 – P(i | x)) • For Minimum error rate • Decide i if P (i | x) > P(j | x) j i • Decision boundaries and decision regions 12 22 P ( 2 ) P( x | 1 ) Let . then decide 1 if : 21 11 P ( 1 ) P( x | 2 ) • If is the 0-1 loss function then the threshold involves only the priors: 0 1 1 0 then P( 2 ) a P( 1 ) 0 2 2 P( 2 ) then if b P( 1 ) 1 0 Classifiers, Discriminant Functions and Decision Surfaces • Many different ways to represent pattern classifiers; one of the most useful is in terms of discriminant functions • The multi-category case • Set of discriminant functions gi(x), i = 1,…,c • Classifier assigns a feature vector x to class i if: gi(x) > gj(x) j i Network Representation of a Classifier • Bayes classifier can be represented in this way, but the choice of discriminant function is not unique • gi(x) = - R(i | x) (max. discriminant corresponds to min. risk!) • For the minimum error rate, we take gi(x) = P(i | x) (max. discrimination corresponds to max. posterior!) gi(x) P(x | i) P(i) gi(x) = ln P(x | i) + ln P(i) (ln: natural logarithm!) • Effect of any decision rule is to divide the feature space into c decision regions if gi(x) > gj(x) j i then x is in Ri (Region Ri means assign x to i) • The two-category case • Here a classifier is a “dichotomizer” that has two discriminant functions g1 and g2 Let g(x) g1(x) – g2(x) Decide 1 if g(x) > 0 ; Otherwise decide 2 • So, a “dichotomizer” computes a single discriminant function g(x) and classifies x according to whether g(x) is positive or not. • Computation of g(x) = g1(x) – g2(x) g( x ) P ( 1 | x ) P ( 2 | x ) P( x | 1 ) P( 1 ) ln ln P( x | 2 ) P( 2 ) The Normal Density • Univariate density: N( , 2) • Normal density is analytically tractable • Continuous density • A number of processes are asymptotically Gaussian • Patterns (e.g., handwritten characters, speech signals ) can be viewed as randomly corrupted versions of a single typical or prototype (Central Limit theorem) P( x ) 2 1 1 x exp , 2 2 where: = mean (or expected value) of x 2 = variance (or expected squared deviation) of x • Multivariate density: N( , ) • Multivariate normal density in d dimensions: P( x ) 1 ( 2 ) d/2 1/ 2 1 t 1 exp ( x ) ( x ) 2 where: x = (x1, x2, …, xd)t (t stands for the transpose of a vector) = (1, 2, …, d)t mean vector = d*d covariance matrix • • • || and -1 are determinant and inverse of , respectively The covariance matrix is always symmetric and positive semidefinite; we assume is positive definite so the determinant of is strictly positive Multivariate normal density is completely specified by [d + d(d+1)/2] parameters If variables x1 and x2 are statistically independent then the covariance of x1 and x2 is zero. Multivariate Normal density Samples drawn from a normal population tend to fall in a single cloud or cluster; cluster center is determined by the mean vector and shape by the covariance matrix The loci of points of constant density are hyperellipsoids whose principal axes are the eigenvectors of r 2 ( x )t 1 ( x ) Transformation of Normal Variables Linear combinations of jointly normally distributed random variables are normally distributed Coordinate transformation can convert an arbitrary multivariate normal distribution into a spherical one Bayesian Decision Theory (Sections 2-6 to 2-9) • Discriminant Functions for the Normal Density • Bayes Decision Theory – Discrete Features Discriminant Functions for the Normal Density • The minimum error-rate classification can be achieved by the discriminant function gi(x) = ln P(x | i) + ln P(i) • In case of multivariate normal densities 1 1 d 1 t g i ( x ) ( x i ) ( x i ) ln 2 ln i ln P ( i ) 2 2 2 i • Case i = 2.I (I is the identity matrix) Features are statistically independent and each feature has the same variance g i ( x ) w x w i 0 (linear discriminant function) t i where : i 1 t wi 2 ; wi 0 i i ln P ( i ) 2 2 ( i 0 is called the threshold for the ith category! ) • A classifier that uses linear discriminant functions is called “a linear machine” • The decision surfaces for a linear machine are pieces of hyperplanes defined by the linear equations: gi(x) = gj(x) • The hyperplane separating Ri and Rj 1 2 x0 ( i j ) 2 i j 2 P( i ) ln ( i j ) P( j ) is orthogonal to the line linking the means! 1 if P ( i ) P ( j ) then x0 ( i j ) 2 • Case 2: i = (covariance matrices of all classes are identical but otherwise arbitrary!) • Hyperplane separating Ri and Rj ln P ( i ) / P ( j ) 1 x0 ( i j ) .( i j ) t 1 2 ( i j ) ( i j ) • The hyperplane separating Ri and Rj is generally not orthogonal to the line between the means! • To classify a feature vector x, measure the squared Mahalanobis distance from x to each of the c means; assign x to the category of the nearest mean Discriminant Functions for 1D Gaussian • Case 3: i = arbitrary • The covariance matrices are different for each category g i ( x ) x tWi x w it x w i 0 where : 1 1 Wi i 2 w i i 1 i 1 t 1 1 w i 0 i i i ln i ln P ( i ) 2 2 In the 2-category case, the decision surfaces are hyperquadrics that can assume any of the general forms: hyperplanes, pairs of hyperplanes, hyperspheres, hyperellipsoids, hyperparaboloids, hyperhyperboloids) Discriminant Functions for the Normal Density Discriminant Functions for the Normal Density Discriminant Functions for the Normal Density Decision Regions for Two-Dimensional Gaussian Data x2 3.514 1.125x1 0.1875x12 Error Probabilities and Integrals • 2-class problem • There are two types of errors • Multi-class problem – Simpler to computer the prob. of being correct (more ways to be wrong than to be right) Error Probabilities and Integrals Bayes optimal decision boundary in 1-D case Error Bounds for Normal Densities • • The exact calculation of the error for the general Guassian case (case 3) is extremely difficult However, in the 2-category case the general error can be approximated analytically to give us an upper bound on the error Error Rate of Linear Discriminant Function (LDF) • Assume a 2-class problem p x ~ N ( , ), p x ~ N ( , ) 1 1 2 2 1 gi ( x) log P( x i ) ( x i )t 1 ( x i ) log P(i ) 2 • Due to the symmetry of the problem (identical ), the two types of errors are identical • Decide x if g ( x) g ( x) or 1 1 2 1 1 t 1 ( x 1 ) ( x 1 ) log P(1 ) ( x 2 )t 1 ( x 2 ) log P(2 ) 2 2 or 1 t 1 t ( 2 1 ) x 1 1 2 1 2 log P(1 ) / P(2 ) 2 t 1 Error Rate of LDF • Let h( x) ( ) x 12 • Compute expected values & variances of when x 1 & x 2 t 2 1 1 t 1 1 t 1 1 2 1 E h( x) x 1 ( 2 1 )t 1 E x 1 1 ( 2 1 )t 1 ( 2 1 ) 2 where 2 h( x) 1 t 1 1 1 t2 1 2 2 1 ( 2 1 )t 1 ( 2 1 ) = squared Mahalanobis distance between 1 & 2 Error Rate of LDF • Similarly 1 2 2 ( 2 1 )t 1 ( 2 1 ) 12 E h( x) 1 1 E ( 2 1 )t 1 ( x 1 ) x 1 2 ( 2 1 )t 1 ( 2 1 ) 2 22 2 p h( x) x 1 ~ N ( , 2 ) p h( x) x 2 ~ N ( , 2 ) Error Rate of LDF 1 P g1 ( x) g 2 ( x) x 1 P h( x) 1 dh t n t 2 1 2 1 e 2 d 2 1 1 erf 2 2 t 4 h( x ) ~ 1 () 1 e 2 2 2 Error Rate of LDF P (1 ) t log P ( ) 2 2 erf (r ) 1 1 2 erf 2 2 r e x2 dx 0 t 4 Total probability of error Pe P (1 )1 P (2 ) 2 Error Rate of LDF 1 P 1 P 2 t 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 erf erf 2 2 4 2 2 ( 1 2 )t 1 ( 1 2 ) 2 2 (i) No Class Separation ( 1 2 )t 1 ( 1 2 ) 0 1 2 1 2 (ii) Perfect Class Separation ( 1 2 )t 1 ( 1 2 ) 0 ∞ 1 2 0 (erf 1) Mahalanobis distance is a good measure of separation between classes Chernoff Bound • To derive a bound for the error, we need the following inequality Assume conditional prob. are normal where Chernoff Bound Chernoff bound for P(error) is found by determining the value of that minimizes exp(-k()) Error Bounds for Normal Densities • Bhattacharyya Bound • Assume = 1/2 • computationally simpler • slightly less tight bound • Now, Eq. (73) has the form When the two covariance matrices are equal, k(1/2) is te same as the Mahalanobis distance between the two means Error Bounds for Gaussian Distributions Chernoff Bound P(error ) P (1 ) P1 (1 ) p ( x | 1 ) p1 ( x | 2 )dx p 0 1 ( x | 1 ) p1 ( x | 2 )dx e k ( ) k ( ) (1 ) 2 1 t ( 2 1 ) [ 1 (1 ) 2 ] ( 2 1 ) 1 1 (1 ) 2 ln 2 |1| |2 |1 Best Chernoff error bound is 0.008190 Bhattacharya Bound (β=1/2) P(error ) P(1 ) P(2 ) P( x | 1 ) P( x | 2 )dx P(1 ) P(2 )e k (1/2) k (1 / 2) 1 / 8( 2 1 ) t 2 1 2 1 2–category, 2D data 1 2 1 2 ( 2 1 ) ln 2 |1 ||2 | Bhattacharya error bound is 0.008191 True error using numerical integration = 0.0021 Neyman-Pearson Rule “Classification, Estimation and Pattern recognition” by Young and Calvert Neyman-Pearson Rule Neyman-Pearson Rule Neyman-Pearson Rule Neyman-Pearson Rule Neyman-Pearson Rule Signal Detection Theory We are interested in detecting a single weak pulse, e.g. radar reflection; the internal signal (x) in detector has mean m1 (m2) when pulse is absent (present) p( x | 1 ) ~ N ( 1 , 2 ) p ( x | 2 ) ~ N ( 2 , 2 ) The detector uses a threshold x* to determine the presence of pulse Discriminability: ease of determining whether the pulse is present or not d' | 1 2 | For given threshold, define hit, false alarm, miss and correct rejection P( x x*| x 2 ) : P( x x*| x 1 ) : P( x x*| x 2 ) : P( x x*| x 1 ) : hit false alarm miss correct rejection Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) • Experimentally compute hit and false alarm rates for • • fixed x* Changing x* will change the hit and false alarm rates A plot of hit and false alarm rates is called the ROC curve Performance shown at different operating points Operating Characteristic • In practice, distributions may not be Gaussian • and will be multidimensional; ROC curve can still be plotted Vary a single control parameter for the decision rule and plot the resulting hit and false alarm rates Bayes Decision Theory – Discrete Features • • Components of x are binary or integer valued; x can take only one of m discrete values v1, v2, …,vm Case of independent binary features for 2-category problem Let x = [x1, x2, …, xd ]t where each xi is either 0 or 1, with probabilities: pi = P(xi = 1 | 1) qi = P(xi = 1 | 2) • The discriminant function in this case is: d g ( x ) w i x i w0 i 1 where : pi ( 1 q i ) w i ln q i ( 1 pi ) i 1 ,..., d and : 1 pi P( 1 ) w0 ln ln 1 qi P( 2 ) i 1 d decide 1 if g(x) 0 and 2 if g(x) 0 Bayesian Decision for Three-dimensional Binary Data • Consider a 2-class problem with three independent binary features; class priors are equal and pi = 0.8 and qi = 0.5, i = 1,2,3 • wi = 1.3863 • w0 = 1.2 • Decision surface g(x) = 0 is shown below Decision boundary for 3D binary features. Left figure shows the case when pi=.8 and qi=.5. Right figure shows case when p3=q3 (Feature 3 is not providing any discriminatory information) so decision surface is parallel to x3 axis Handling Missing Features • Suppose it is not possible to measure a certain feature for a given pattern • Possible solutions: • Reject the pattern • Approximate the missing feature • • Mean of all the available values for the missing feature Marginalize over the distribution of the missing feature Handling Missing Features Other Topics • Compound Bayes Decision Theory & Context – Consecutive states of nature might not be statistically independent; in sorting two types of fish, arrival of next fish may not be independent of the previous fish – Can we exploit such statistical dependence to gain improved performance (use of context) – Compound decision vs. sequential compound decision problems – Markov dependence • Sequential Decision Making – Feature measurement process is sequential (as in medical diagnosis) – Feature measurement cost – Minimize the no. of features to be measured while achieving a sufficient accuracy; minimize a combination of feature measurement cost & classification accuracy Context in Text Recognition