Kaggle Summary: BOSCH (kernels)

Introduction

We will update the information of Kaggle who participated in the past. Here, we will pick up useful code published in the kernel of BOSCH. For the outline of the competition and the code of the winner, Kaggle Summary: BOSCH (intro + forum discussion), [Kaggle Summary: BOSCH (winner)](http: It is summarized in //qiita.com/TomHortons/items/51aa356455c0b6e8945a), and this is a summary of the analysis results of the data including the sample code.

This article uses Python 2.7, numpy 1.11, scipy 0.17, scikit-learn 0.18, matplotlib 1.5, seaborn 0.7, pandas 0.17. It has been confirmed to work on jupyter notebook. (Please modify% matplotlib inline appropriately) If you find any errors when you run the sample script, it would be helpful if you could comment.

table of contents

1. Examine the periodicity of data from the autocorrelation coefficient
2. Try to solve the two-classification problem of large-scale data with XGBoost
3. Magic Features
4. EDA of important features
5. Compression and visualization of missing values using t-SNE (using R)
6. Production line directed graph notation (using R)

1. Examine the periodicity of data from the autocorrelation coefficient

This time all the data is thoroughly anonymized. Timestamps are no exception. In the first place, it is a mystery whether the time of the date file is 1 second or 1 hour, or it is not a good value. In Data Exploration, beluga approaches this point from the autocorrelation coefficient.

A quick look at train_date.csv reveals the following:

• 1157 columns
• 80% or more missing values
• Variables in the same station often have the same timestamp

First, get all variable data of the first 10000 from TRAIN_DATE.

date_missing.py

%matplotlib inline
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import seaborn as sns

train_date_part = pd.read_csv(TRAIN_DATE, nrows=10000)
print(train_date_part.shape)
print(1.0 * train_date_part.count().sum() / train_date_part.size)

From the execution results, we can see that only 17.8% of the 10000 are real numbers.

(10000, 1157)
0.177920570441

1.1. Examine the time stamp for each station

Next, find out how close the time stamps in the station are.

read_station_times.py

# Let's check the min and max times for each station
def get_station_times(dates, withId=False):
    times = []
    cols = list(dates.columns)
    if 'Id' in cols:
        cols.remove('Id')
    for feature_name in cols:
        if withId:
            df = dates[['Id', feature_name]].copy()
            df.columns = ['Id', 'time']
        else:
            df = dates[[feature_name]].copy()
            df.columns = ['time']
        df['station'] = feature_name.split('_')[1][1:]
        df = df.dropna()
        times.append(df)
    return pd.concat(times)

station_times = get_station_times(train_date_part, withId=True).sort_values(by=['Id', 'station'])
print(station_times[:5])
print(station_times.shape)
min_station_times = station_times.groupby(['Id', 'station']).min()['time']
max_station_times = station_times.groupby(['Id', 'station']).max()['time']
print(np.mean(1. * (min_station_times == max_station_times)))

Missing values have been removed. See the execution result below. Over 98% of all stations have the same time stamp. Therefore, here, to simplify the problem, the time stamps in the station are all equal. Since there are 52 types of stations, the number of variables to be examined is greatly reduced. (It's just the result of looking at 1% of all date files)

   Id   time station
0   4  82.24       0
0   4  82.24       0
0   4  82.24       0
0   4  82.24       0
0   4  82.24       0
(2048541, 3)
0.9821721580467314

1.2. Plot the number of samples per hour in chronological order

Read the station data of train and test.

read_train_test_station_date.py

# Read station times for train and test
date_cols = train_date_part.drop('Id', axis=1).count().reset_index().sort_values(by=0, ascending=False)
date_cols['station'] = date_cols['index'].apply(lambda s: s.split('_')[1])
date_cols = date_cols.drop_duplicates('station', keep='first')['index'].tolist()

train_date = pd.read_csv(TRAIN_DATE, usecols=date_cols)
train_station_times = get_station_times(train_date, withId=False)
train_time_cnt = train_station_times.groupby('time').count()[['station']].reset_index()
train_time_cnt.columns = ['time', 'cnt']

test_date = pd.read_csv(TEST_DATE, usecols=date_cols)
test_station_times = get_station_times(test_date, withId=False)
test_time_cnt = test_station_times.groupby('time').count()[['station']].reset_index()
test_time_cnt.columns = ['time', 'cnt']

Map the time stamp and the number of numerical data acquired at that time.

fig = plt.figure()
plt.plot(train_time_cnt['time'].values, train_time_cnt['cnt'].values, 'b.', alpha=0.1, label='train')
plt.plot(test_time_cnt['time'].values, test_time_cnt['cnt'].values, 'r.', alpha=0.1, label='test')
plt.title('Original date values')
plt.ylabel('Number of records')
plt.xlabel('Time')
fig.savefig('original_date_values.png', dpi=300)
plt.show()

print((train_time_cnt['time'].min(), train_time_cnt['time'].max()))
print((test_time_cnt['time'].min(), test_time_cnt['time'].max()))

The maximum and minimum values of the time stamp are as follows.

(0.0, 1718.48)
(0.0, 1718.49)

The result of the plot looks like this. Both train and test have exactly the same plot results.

To summarize what we have learned about date files so far,

• Train and test have the same time interval
• There is something that seems to be obvious periodicity
• Timestamps are acquired with an accuracy of 0-1718 and 0.01.
• There is a gap in the middle

1.3. Find out how many seconds 0.01 is in real time

Let's find out how many seconds 0.01 is in real time. If you want to find the correction from unknown data, you can use the autocorrelation coefficient.

time_ticks = np.arange(train_time_cnt['time'].min(), train_time_cnt['time'].max() + 0.01, 0.01)
time_ticks = pd.DataFrame({'time': time_ticks})
time_ticks = pd.merge(time_ticks, train_time_cnt, how='left', on='time')
time_ticks = time_ticks.fillna(0)
# Autocorrelation
x = time_ticks['cnt'].values
max_lag = 8000
auto_corr_ks = range(1, max_lag)
auto_corr = np.array([1] + [np.corrcoef(x[:-k], x[k:])[0, 1] for k in auto_corr_ks])
fig = plt.figure()
plt.plot(auto_corr, 'k.', label='autocorrelation by 0.01')
plt.title('Train Sensor Time Auto-correlation')
period = 25
auto_corr_ks = list(range(period, max_lag, period))
auto_corr = np.array([1] + [np.corrcoef(x[:-k], x[k:])[0, 1] for k in auto_corr_ks])
plt.plot([0] + auto_corr_ks, auto_corr, 'go', alpha=0.5, label='strange autocorrelation at 0.25')
period = 1675
auto_corr_ks = list(range(period, max_lag, period))
auto_corr = np.array([1] + [np.corrcoef(x[:-k], x[k:])[0, 1] for k in auto_corr_ks])
plt.plot([0] + auto_corr_ks, auto_corr, 'ro', markersize=10, alpha=0.5, label='one week = 16.75?')
plt.xlabel('k * 0.01 -  autocorrelation lag')
plt.ylabel('autocorrelation')
plt.legend(loc=0)
fig.savefig('train_time_auto_correlation.png', dpi=300)

It seems that there is no problem considering 16.75 as one cycle. Here, compress it every 16.75 and map the number of numerical data again.

I could clearly see the periodicity of one week. I can also observe the holidays.

From the above, it was found that 0.01 == 6min. __

2. Try to solve the two-classification problem of large-scale data with XGBoost

It is also important to try to classify directly from the raw data without thinking too complicated at first. However, this time we are dealing with data that does not fit in the memory, so some ingenuity is required. Here, we will execute the learning of XGBoost using 10% of the total data.

2.1. Data read and importance measurement

chunk.py

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
from xgboost import XGBClassifier
from sklearn.metrics import matthews_corrcoef, roc_auc_score
from sklearn.cross_validation import cross_val_score, StratifiedKFold
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import seaborn as sns
%matplotlib inline

# I'm limited by RAM here and taking the first N rows is likely to be
# a bad idea for the date data since it is ordered.
# Sample the data in a roundabout way:
date_chunks = pd.read_csv(TRAIN_DATE, index_col=0, chunksize=100000, dtype=np.float32)
num_chunks = pd.read_csv(TRAIN_NUMERIC, index_col=0,
                         usecols=list(range(969)), chunksize=100000, dtype=np.float32)
X = pd.concat([pd.concat([dchunk, nchunk], axis=1).sample(frac=0.05)
               for dchunk, nchunk in zip(date_chunks, num_chunks)])
y = pd.read_csv(TRAIN_NUMERIC, index_col=0, usecols=[0,969], dtype=np.float32).loc[X.index].values.ravel()
X = X.values

In this way, by specifying chunksize in pandas.read_csv, you can put it in memory well.

make_clf.py

clf = XGBClassifier(base_score=0.005)
clf.fit(X, y)

Prepare XGBoost and

importance.py

# threshold for a manageable number of features
plt.hist(clf.feature_importances_[clf.feature_importances_>0])
important_indices = np.where(clf.feature_importances_>0.005)[0]
print(important_indices)

Filter the variables that contributed to the classification from XGBoost.feature_importances. The execution result is as follows.

[  14   23   41   50  385 1019 1029 1034 1042 1056 1156 1161 1166 1171 1172
 1183 1203 1221 1294 1327 1350 1363 1403 1404 1482 1501 1507 1512 1535 1549
 1550 1843 1846 1849 1858 1879 1885 1887 1888 1891 1911 1940 1948 1951 1959
 1974 1975 1982 1985 1988 1993 1994 1995 1999 2006 2007 2010 2028 2040 2046
 2075 2093]

2.2. Target important variables and solve classification problems

From the results so far, only important variables were extracted using 10% of the total data. We will focus on this important variable and read it.

read_important_features.py

# load entire dataset for these features. 
# note where the feature indices are split so we can load the correct ones straight from read_csv
n_date_features = 1156
X = np.concatenate([
    pd.read_csv(TRAIN_DATE, index_col=0, dtype=np.float32,
                usecols=np.concatenate([[0], important_indices[important_indices < n_date_features] + 1])).values,
    pd.read_csv(TRAIN_NUMERIC, index_col=0, dtype=np.float32,
                usecols=np.concatenate([[0], important_indices[important_indices >= n_date_features] + 1 - 1156])).values
], axis=1)
y = pd.read_csv(TRAIN_NUMERIC, index_col=0, dtype=np.float32, usecols=[0,969]).values.ravel()

Select the data from imortant_indices and read it.

CV.py

clf = XGBClassifier(max_depth=5, base_score=0.005)
cv = StratifiedKFold(y, n_folds=3)
preds = np.ones(y.shape[0])
for i, (train, test) in enumerate(cv):
    preds[test] = clf.fit(X[train], y[train]).predict_proba(X[test])[:,1]
    print("fold {}, ROC AUC: {:.3f}".format(i, roc_auc_score(y[test], preds[test])))
print(roc_auc_score(y, preds))

Check the accuracy with Cross-validation.

fold 0, ROC AUC: 0.718
fold 1, ROC AUC: 0.704
fold 2, ROC AUC: 0.698
0.706413059353

thres.py

# pick the best threshold out-of-fold
thresholds = np.linspace(0.01, 0.99, 50)
mcc = np.array([matthews_corrcoef(y, preds>thr) for thr in thresholds])
plt.plot(thresholds, mcc)
best_threshold = thresholds[mcc.argmax()]
print(mcc.max())

Since the evaluation index this time is MCC, it seems better to tune the threshold value for judging defective products from the probability of the prediction result. The following figure shows the result of checking.

0.213120930917

2.3. Generate a file for submission

It was found that this threshold can be achieved up to MCC = 0.213. Generate a file for submission using the tuned threshold.

make_submission.py

# load test data
X = np.concatenate([
    pd.read_csv("../input/test_date.csv", index_col=0, dtype=np.float32,
                usecols=np.concatenate([[0], important_indices[important_indices<1156]+1])).values,
    pd.read_csv("../input/test_numeric.csv", index_col=0, dtype=np.float32,
                usecols=np.concatenate([[0], important_indices[important_indices>=1156] +1 - 1156])).values
], axis=1)

# generate predictions at the chosen threshold
preds = (clf.predict_proba(X)[:,1] > best_threshold).astype(np.int8)

# and submit
sub = pd.read_csv("../input/sample_submission.csv", index_col=0)
sub["Response"] = preds
sub.to_csv("submission.csv.gz", compression="gzip")

3. Magic Features The magic feature is a trick that gives accuracy even though no one knows why accuracy comes out. I don't know why I came up with this, but it doesn't seem to be applicable to other kaggle competitions, so please refer to it.

3.1. Original sample code

# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
"""
@author: Faron
"""
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
import xgboost as xgb

DATA_DIR = "../input"

ID_COLUMN = 'Id'
TARGET_COLUMN = 'Response'

SEED = 0
CHUNKSIZE = 50000
NROWS = 250000

TRAIN_NUMERIC = "{0}/train_numeric.csv".format(DATA_DIR)
TRAIN_DATE = "{0}/train_date.csv".format(DATA_DIR)

TEST_NUMERIC = "{0}/test_numeric.csv".format(DATA_DIR)
TEST_DATE = "{0}/test_date.csv".format(DATA_DIR)

FILENAME = "etimelhoods"

train = pd.read_csv(TRAIN_NUMERIC, usecols=[ID_COLUMN, TARGET_COLUMN], nrows=NROWS)
test = pd.read_csv(TEST_NUMERIC, usecols=[ID_COLUMN], nrows=NROWS)

train["StartTime"] = -1
test["StartTime"] = -1


nrows = 0
for tr, te in zip(pd.read_csv(TRAIN_DATE, chunksize=CHUNKSIZE), pd.read_csv(TEST_DATE, chunksize=CHUNKSIZE)):
    feats = np.setdiff1d(tr.columns, [ID_COLUMN])

    stime_tr = tr[feats].min(axis=1).values
    stime_te = te[feats].min(axis=1).values

    train.loc[train.Id.isin(tr.Id), 'StartTime'] = stime_tr
    test.loc[test.Id.isin(te.Id), 'StartTime'] = stime_te

    nrows += CHUNKSIZE
    if nrows >= NROWS:
        break


ntrain = train.shape[0]
train_test = pd.concat((train, test)).reset_index(drop=True).reset_index(drop=False)

train_test['magic1'] = train_test[ID_COLUMN].diff().fillna(9999999).astype(int)
train_test['magic2'] = train_test[ID_COLUMN].iloc[::-1].diff().fillna(9999999).astype(int)

train_test = train_test.sort_values(by=['StartTime', 'Id'], ascending=True)

train_test['magic3'] = train_test[ID_COLUMN].diff().fillna(9999999).astype(int)
train_test['magic4'] = train_test[ID_COLUMN].iloc[::-1].diff().fillna(9999999).astype(int)

train_test = train_test.sort_values(by=['index']).drop(['index'], axis=1)
train = train_test.iloc[:ntrain, :]

features = np.setdiff1d(list(train.columns), [TARGET_COLUMN, ID_COLUMN])

y = train.Response.ravel()
train = np.array(train[features])

print('train: {0}'.format(train.shape))
prior = np.sum(y) / (1.*len(y))

xgb_params = {
    'seed': 0,
    'colsample_bytree': 0.7,
    'silent': 1,
    'subsample': 0.7,
    'learning_rate': 0.1,
    'objective': 'binary:logistic',
    'max_depth': 4,
    'num_parallel_tree': 1,
    'min_child_weight': 2,
    'eval_metric': 'auc',
    'base_score': prior
}


dtrain = xgb.DMatrix(train, label=y)
res = xgb.cv(xgb_params, dtrain, num_boost_round=10, nfold=4, seed=0, stratified=True,
             early_stopping_rounds=1, verbose_eval=1, show_stdv=True)

cv_mean = res.iloc[-1, 0]
cv_std = res.iloc[-1, 1]

print('CV-Mean: {0}+{1}'.format(cv_mean, cv_std))

If you take the difference of Id, reverse it, and repeat it again, you will get a magic feature that exceeds MCC> 0.4. Looking at the comments of the top performers, it seems that even higher scores can be obtained without using this.

3.2. Analyze magic features

Let's take a closer look at why the accuracy comes out.

def twoplot(df, col, xaxis=None):
    ''' scatter plot a feature split into response values as two subgraphs '''
    if col not in df.columns.values:
        print('ERROR: %s not a column' % col)
    ndf = pd.DataFrame(index = df.index)
    ndf[col] = df[col]
    ndf[xaxis] = df[xaxis] if xaxis else df.index
    ndf['Response'] = df['Response']
    
    g = sns.FacetGrid(ndf, col="Response", hue="Response")
    g.map(plt.scatter, xaxis, col, alpha=.7, s=1)
    g.add_legend();
    
    del ndf

Here is the result of creating two plots so that you can see the two plots and looking at magic1, magic2, magic3, and magic4.

You can see the difference between good and bad products in magic3 and magic4. It is said that accuracy can be obtained by combining these magic3 and magic4 with raw data, date, and category.

4. EDA of important features As a result of the contributor selecting about 700 variables from nearly 1000 variables and calculating, it seems that MCC = 0.25. In order to improve the accuracy, it is necessary to create some new features. Therefore, I examined how to create new features.

4.1. Data read and label splitting

First, using some sample data and XGBoost, we selected 20 parameters that are most likely to contribute to defective product detection. The sample feature_names is the selected variable.

data_preparation.py

%matplotlib inline
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import seaborn as sns


feature_names = ['L3_S38_F3960', 'L3_S33_F3865', 'L3_S38_F3956', 'L3_S33_F3857',
       'L3_S29_F3321', 'L1_S24_F1846', 'L3_S32_F3850', 'L3_S29_F3354',
       'L3_S29_F3324', 'L3_S35_F3889', 'L0_S1_F28', 'L1_S24_F1844',
       'L3_S29_F3376', 'L0_S0_F22', 'L3_S33_F3859', 'L3_S38_F3952', 
       'L3_S30_F3754', 'L2_S26_F3113', 'L3_S30_F3759', 'L0_S5_F114']

Next, read the selected features. At the same time, classify into two data by'Response'. In other words, the data when a defective product occurs and the data when a non-defective product occurs are divided into two.

read_and_split.py

numeric_cols = pd.read_csv("../input/train_numeric.csv", nrows = 1).columns.values
imp_idxs = [np.argwhere(feature_name == numeric_cols)[0][0] for feature_name in feature_names]
train = pd.read_csv("../input/train_numeric.csv", 
                index_col = 0, header = 0, usecols = [0, len(numeric_cols) - 1] + imp_idxs)
train = train[feature_names + ['Response']]
X_neg, X_pos = train[train['Response'] == 0].iloc[:, :-1], train[train['Response']==1].iloc[:, :-1]

4.2. Confirmation of distribution

Next, check the violin plot of each variable. As a result, if individual variables are independent and variables with different distribution shapes can be found, defective products can be estimated from conditional probabilities such as naive Bayes. I created Sample code to visualize all variables and output to a file (4.1), so please refer to that as well.

BATCH_SIZE = 5
train_batch =[pd.melt(train[train.columns[batch: batch + BATCH_SIZE].append(np.array(['Response']))], 
                      id_vars = 'Response', value_vars = feature_names[batch: batch + BATCH_SIZE])
              for batch in list(range(0, train.shape[1] - 1, BATCH_SIZE))]
FIGSIZE = (12,16)
_, axs = plt.subplots(len(train_batch), figsize = FIGSIZE)
plt.suptitle('Univariate distributions')
for data, ax in zip(train_batch, axs):
    sns.violinplot(x = 'variable',  y = 'value', hue = 'Response', data = data, ax = ax, split =True)

Here is the mapping result.

It is not possible to judge whether the proportion of missing values is too large and the shape of the distribution is different, or whether the number of samples on one side is too small. Therefore, let's visualize these 20 variables by the ratio of missing values.

non_missing = pd.DataFrame(pd.concat([(X_neg.count()/X_neg.shape[0]).to_frame('negative samples'),
                                      (X_pos.count()/X_pos.shape[0]).to_frame('positive samples'),  
                                      ], 
                       axis = 1))
non_missing_sort = non_missing.sort_values(['negative samples'])
non_missing_sort.plot.barh(title = 'Proportion of non-missing values', figsize = FIGSIZE)
plt.gca().invert_yaxis()

Here are the results. You can see that about half of the variables are missing more than 50%.

4.3. Search for new features from the correlation coefficient

In violin plot, each variable was checked as an independent variable. Next, we will search for features in terms of correlation. Divide the data by label and create Correlation Heatmap.

FIGSIZE = (13,4)
_, (ax1, ax2) = plt.subplots(1,2, figsize = FIGSIZE)
MIN_PERIODS = 100

triang_mask = np.zeros((X_pos.shape[1], X_pos.shape[1]))
triang_mask[np.triu_indices_from(triang_mask)] = True

ax1.set_title('Negative Class')
sns.heatmap(X_neg.corr(min_periods = MIN_PERIODS), mask = triang_mask, square=True,  ax = ax1)

ax2.set_title('Positive Class')
sns.heatmap(X_pos.corr(min_periods = MIN_PERIODS), mask = triang_mask, square=True,  ax = ax2)

Look for variables whose correlation is broken when a defective product occurs. I'm just looking for the difference here, but I'm a little skeptical if this approach is really correct.

sns.heatmap(X_pos.corr(min_periods = MIN_PERIODS) -X_neg.corr(min_periods = MIN_PERIODS), 
             mask = triang_mask, square=True)

There were some combinations of variables whose correlations were broken when defective products occurred. Compressing these with PCA may produce good variables.

In terms of features, the missing value itself may be new information. In the same procedure, divide the missing value for each label and obtain the correlation coefficient.

nan_pos, nan_neg = np.isnan(X_pos), np.isnan(X_neg)

triang_mask = np.zeros((X_pos.shape[1], X_pos.shape[1]))
triang_mask[np.triu_indices_from(triang_mask)] = True

FIGSIZE = (13,4)
_, (ax1, ax2) = plt.subplots(1,2, figsize = FIGSIZE)
MIN_PERIODS = 100

ax1.set_title('Negative Class')
sns.heatmap(nan_neg.corr(),   square=True, mask = triang_mask, ax = ax1)

ax2.set_title('Positive Class')
sns.heatmap(nan_pos.corr(), square=True, mask = triang_mask,  ax = ax2)

Similarly, by taking the difference of the coefficients, the variables whose frequency of occurrence of missing values changes when defective products occur are visualized.

sns.heatmap(nan_neg.corr() - nan_pos.corr(), mask = triang_mask, square=True)

5. Compression and visualization of missing values using t-SNE (using R)

See Discussion here In addition, the missing values of the numerical data are dropped from multidimensional data to 2D using t-SNE. The language used is R. Obtain the correlation coefficient from the Pearson correlation for the missing values (NAN to 0, present to 1) of all variables. The calculated result is provided as a zip file at the link destination. (cor_train_numeric.csv) Here is the code to t-SNE using this file and the result. Although t-SNE is an excellent dimensional compression method, this result has not been used effectively in this competition.

library(data.table)
library(Rtsne)
library(ggplot2)
library(ggrepel)
cor_out <- as.matrix(fread("cor_train_numeric.csv", header = TRUE, sep = ","))
gc(verbose = FALSE)
set.seed(78)
tsne_model <- Rtsne(data.frame(cor_out),
                    dims = 2,
                    #initial_dims = 50,
                    initial_dims = ncol(cor_out),
                    perplexity = 322, #floor((ncol(cor_out)-1)/3)
                    theta = 0.00,
                    check_duplicates = FALSE,
                    pca = FALSE,
                    max_iter = 1350,
                    verbose = TRUE,
                    is_distance = FALSE)
corMatrix_out <- as.data.frame(tsne_model$Y)
    cor_kmeans <- kmeans(corMatrix_out, centers = 5, iter.max = 10, nstart = 3)
    corMatrix_outclust <- as.factor(c(cor_kmeans$cluster[1:968], 6))
corMatrix_names <- colnames(cor_out)
ggplot(corMatrix_out, aes(x = V1, y = V2, color = corMatrix_outclust, shape = corMatrix_outclust)) + geom_point(size = 2.5) + geom_rug() + stat_ellipse(type = "norm") + ggtitle("T-SNE of Features") + xlab("X") + ylab("Y") + labs(color = "Cluster", shape = "Cluster") + geom_text_repel(aes(x = V1, y = V2, label = corMatrix_names), size = 2.8)

Here is the code to create a binary of missing values in R. At least 16GB of memory is required.

library(propagate)
for (i in 1:969) {
  cat("\rStep ", i, "\n", sep = "")
  train_data[!is.na(train_data[, i]), i] <- 1
  train_data[is.na(train_data[, i]), i] <- 0
  if (i %% 10) {gc(verbose = FALSE)}
}
gc(verbose = FALSE)

cor_table <- bigcor(train_data, fun = "cor", size = 194, verbose = TRUE)

6. Production line directed graph notation (using R)

This program uses R. By using GGplot, I am drawing a very sophisticated workflow. As I wrote in Article about the winner, one of the key points was whether or not we could find a correlation from the relationship of this production line.

options(warn=-1) #surpress warnings

#imports for data wrangling
library(data.table)
library(dtplyr)
library(dplyr)

#get the data - nrows set to 10000 to keep runtime manageable.
#one expansion option would be to select a time frame to visualized
dtNum <- fread("input/train_numeric.csv", select = c("Id", "Response"),nrows = 10000)
dtDate <- fread("input/train_date.csv", nrows = 10000)

#for each job identify which stations are passed through and for those store the minimum time
for (station in paste0("S",0:51))
{
  cols = min(which((grepl(station,colnames(dtDate)))))
  if(!cols==Inf){
    dtDate[,paste0(station) := dtDate[,cols,with = FALSE]]
  }
}

#limit data to only when passed through station X
dtStations = dtDate[,!grepl("L",colnames(dtDate)),with=F]

#melt data to go from wide to long format
dtStationsM = melt(dtStations,id.vars=c("Id"))

#join with numeric to have Response
dtStationsM %>%
  left_join(dtNum, by = "Id") -> dtStationsM

#remove NA entries - these are plentiful as after melting each station-job combination has its own row
dtStationsM %>%
  filter(!is.na(value)) -> dtStationsMFiltered

#sort entries by ascending time
dtStationsMFiltered %>%
  arrange(value) -> dtStationsMFiltered

#imports for plotting
require(GGally)
library(network)
library(sna)
library(ggplot2)

#plotting format
options(repr.plot.width=5, repr.plot.height=15)

#for each row obtain the subsequent statoin
dtStationsMFiltered %>%
  group_by(Id) %>%
  mutate(nextStation = lead(variable)) -> edgelistsComplete

#for each id find the first node to be entered 
edgelistsComplete %>%
  group_by(Id) %>%
  filter(!(variable %in% nextStation)) %>%
  ungroup() %>%
  select(variable,Response) -> startingPoints

#prior to each starting point insert an edge from a common origin
colnames(startingPoints) = c("nextStation","Response")
startingPoints$variable = "S"
edgelistsComplete %>%
  select(variable,nextStation,Response) -> paths

#for each id find the row where there is no next station (last station to be visited)
#fill this station with Response value
paths[is.na(nextStation)]$nextStation = paste("Result",paths[is.na(nextStation)]$Response)

#combine data
paths = rbind(startingPoints,paths)
paths = select(paths,-Response)
paths$nextStation = as.character(paths$nextStation)
paths$variable = as.character(paths$variable)

#rename columns for plotting
colnames(paths) <- c("Target","Source")

#flip columns in a costly way because ggnet is a little dumb and I am lazy
pathshelp = select(paths,Source)
pathshelp$Target = paths$Target
paths=pathshelp

#create network from edgelist
net = network(as.data.frame(na.omit(paths)),
              directed = TRUE)

#create a station-line mapping lookup
LineStations = NULL
for (station in unique(paths$Source)){
  if(station!="S")
  {
    x=paste0("_",station,"_")
    y=head(colnames(dtDate)[which(grepl(x,colnames(dtDate)))],1)
    y=strsplit(y,"_")[[1]][1]
    LineStations = rbind(LineStations,data.frame(Node=station,Line=y))
  }
}
LineStations = rbind(LineStations,data.frame(Node=c("Result 1","Result 0","S"),Line=c("Outcome","Outcome","START")))

#merge station-line mapping into graph for coloring purposes
x = data.frame(Node = network.vertex.names(net))
x = merge(x, LineStations, by = "Node", sort = FALSE)$Line
net %v% "line" = as.character(x)

#setup station coordinates analogue to @JohnM
nodeCoordinates=data.frame(label=c("S","S0","S1","S2","S3","S4","S5","S6",
                                   "S7","S8","S9","S10","S11","S12","S13",
                                   "S14","S15","S16","S17","S18","S19",
                                   "S20","S21","S22","S23","S24","S25",
                                   "S26","S27","S28","S29","S30","S31",
                                   "S32","S33","S34","S35","S36","S37",
                                   "S38","S39","S40","S41","S43",
                                   "S44","S45","S47","S48","S49",
                                   "S50","S51","Result 0","Result 1"),
                           y=c(0,
                               1,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,7,7,7,
                               1,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,7,7,7,
                               6,6,7,7,7,
                               8,9,10,10,10,11,11,12,13,14,
                               8,9,10,11,11,12,13,14,15,15,16,
                               17,17),
                           x=c(5,
                               9,9,10,8,10,8,10,8,7,10,9,8,
                               5,5,6,4,6,4,6,4,5,6,5,4,
                               2,0,2,1,0,
                               7,7,8,7,6,8,6,7,7,7,
                               3,3,3,4,2,3,3,3,4,2,3,
                               7,3))

nodeCoordinates$y = -3 * nodeCoordinates$y

#setup initial plot
network = ggnet2(net)

#grab node list from initial plot and attach coordinates
netCoordinates = select(network$data,label)
netCoordinates = left_join(netCoordinates,nodeCoordinates,by = "label")
netCoordinates = as.matrix(select(netCoordinates,x,y))

#setup plot with manual layout
network = ggnet2(net,
                 alpha = 0.75, size = "indegree",
                 label = T, size.cut = 4,
                 color = "line",palette = "Set1",
                 mode = netCoordinates,
                 edge.alpha = 0.5, edge.size = 1,
                 legend.position = "bottom")


#output plot on graphics device
print(network)

When you run it, it looks like this

Let's take a look at the breakdown.

#obtain summary statistic of number of edges on each station pair
pathshelp %>%
    mutate(stationpair=paste0(Source,"->",Target)) %>%
    group_by(stationpair) %>%
    summarize(count=n()) %>%
    arrange(-count) %>%
    print(n=10)

pathshelp %>%
    mutate(stationpair=paste0(Source,"->",Target)) %>%
    group_by(stationpair) %>%
    summarize(count=n()) %>%
    arrange(count) %>%
    print(n=10)

pathshelp %>%
    filter(Target=="Result 1") %>%
    mutate(stationpair=paste0(Source,"->",Target)) %>%
    group_by(stationpair) %>%
    summarize(count=n()) %>%
    arrange(count) %>%
    print(n=20)

pathshelp %>%
    filter(Target=="Result 0") %>%
    mutate(stationpair=paste0(Source,"->",Target)) %>%
    group_by(stationpair) %>%
    summarize(count=n()) %>%
    arrange(count) %>%
    print(n=20)

The execution result is as follows. You can see how often you are transitioning from one station to another.

# tbl_dt [162 × 2]
     stationpair count
           <chr> <int>
1       S29->S30  9452
2       S33->S34  9421
3  S37->Result 0  9211
4       S30->S33  8977
5          S->S0  5733
6         S0->S1  5726
7       S36->S37  4827
8       S34->S36  4801
9       S35->S37  4646
10      S34->S35  4635
# ... with 152 more rows
Source: local data table [162 x 2]

# tbl_dt [162 × 2]
   stationpair count
         <chr> <int>
1       S->S30     1
2     S22->S23     1
3      S6->S10     1
4     S10->S40     1
5     S16->S17     1
6     S28->S30     1
7     S21->S23     1
8       S2->S3     1
9     S24->S25     1
10      S4->S5     1
# ... with 152 more rows
Source: local data table [3 x 2]

# tbl_dt [3 × 2]
    stationpair count
          <chr> <int>
1 S51->Result 1     2
2 S38->Result 1     4
3 S37->Result 1    47
Source: local data table [6 x 2]

# tbl_dt [6 × 2]
    stationpair count
          <chr> <int>
1 S50->Result 0     1
2 S35->Result 0     3
3 S36->Result 0     3
4 S38->Result 0   227
5 S51->Result 0   499
6 S37->Result 0  9211

If I write more here, I thought that the volume was too large, so I dig deeper about this path in Another article. Visualization of the transition amount of each path, comparison for each Response, and development contents when using NetworkX, which is a Python library, are summarized, so please check if you like.