knitr::opts_chunk$set( collapse = TRUE, comment = "#>" )
The goal of randomForestVIP
is to tune and select a Random Forest model with high
accuracy and interpretability. This is done by tuning the Random Forest
based on the accuracy and variable importance metrics associated with each
model. To accomplish this, functions are available to tabulate and plot
results designed to help the user select an optimal model.
The function mtry_compare
may be used to tune the hyper-parameter mtry
based on model performance and variable importance metrics. This grid-search
technique provides tables and plots showing the effect of mtry on each of the
assessment metrics. It also returns each of the evaluated models to the user.
This package also contains functions for assessing relationships among the
predictor variables and between the predictors and response. These
are relevant for any predictive model, not just Random Forests. Metrics such
as partial correlations and variance inflation factors are available for a variety of modeling techniques (not just linear regressions). These are tabulated and
plotted for the analyst using the functions partial_cor
and robust_vifs
.
The package also provides superior ggplot2
variable importance plots for
individual models using the function ggvip
. This function is a highly
aesthetic and editable improvement upon the function randomForest::varImpPlot
and other basic importance graphics.
All of the plots generated by these functions are developed with ggplot2
techniques so that the user has the ability to edit and improve further upon
the plots.
For methodology see "Contributions to Random Forest Variable Importance with Applications in R" https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/8587/.
library(randomForestVIP) library(MASS) library(EZtune)
To introduce the functionality of randomForestVIP
, we look at modeling the Boston
housing data (found in the MASS package). We want to
build a Random Forest model with a view towards both accuracy and
interpretability. We begin by running some preliminary diagnostics on our data.
set.seed(1234) pcs <- partial_cor(medv ~ ., data = Boston, model = lm) pcs$plot_y_part_cors rv <- robust_vifs(medv ~ ., data = Boston, model = lm) rv$plot_lin_vifs
These functions assess concerns with collinearity. Notice that the VIFs from
robust_vifs
are all less than 10. The partial correlations with the response
from partial_cor
are a type of pseudo-importance assessing the importance
each variable does not share with the others. Now we tune our model by
assessing four different mtry values in the mtry_compare
function.
set.seed(1) m <- mtry_compare(medv ~ ., data = Boston, sqrt = TRUE, mvec = c(1, 4, 9, 13), num_var = 7 ) m$gg_model_errors m$model_errors
According to the accuracy plot and table above, our best choice is when mtry is 4. However, the accuracy for the best model is notably only slightly better than the models with mtry set to 9 and 13. We now look at the variable importance metrics across the different models.
m$gg_var_imp_error
The top two variables are consistently identified as more important than the other variables and their order remains unchanged across mtry. However, the variables 'nox' and 'dis' switch order as mtry increases. Pollution (nox) has a strong negative correlation with distance to employment centers (dis). This makes sense if the employment centers are responsible for much of the pollution. If many home buyers consider distance to work more important than pollution when selecting a house, 'dis' is more likely to be a causal driver of price than 'nox'. By this reasoning, the model where mtry is 9 appears to be superior to the model where mtry is 4, despite mtry of 4 yielding slightly more accurate results.
We now take our selected model and build individual importance plots for it
using ggvip
.
g <- ggvip(m$rf9)$both_vips
The plot above resembles a standard variable importance plot, but possesses superior tick labels and editing capabilities for the analyst.
We have used the randomForestVIP
package to tune a strong model for prediction and with
reasonably useful importance values. This was accomplished by assessing
variable importance and accuracy metrics across the hyper-parameter mtry.
library(randomForestVIP)
To further demonstrate the functionality of randomForestVIP
, we provide another
example. This time using classification data. We look at modeling the Lichen
data (found in the EZtune package) with a view towards both accuracy and
interpretability. The response is presence or absence (coded 0 or 1) of a
lichen species, Lobaria oregana. We begin by running preliminary diagnostics on
our data using partial_cor
and robust_vifs
.
set.seed(1234) lichen <- EZtune::lichen[, -c(1, 3:8)] pairs(lichen[, c(16, 20, 26)]) cor(lichen[, c(16, 20, 26)]) pcs <- partial_cor(factor(LobaOreg) ~ ., data = lichen, model = lm, num_var = 15 ) pcs$plot_y_part_cors rv <- robust_vifs(factor(LobaOreg) ~ ., data = lichen, model = lm, num_var = 15 ) rv$plot_nonlin_vifs
These variables exhibit high collinearity. To illustrate this observation, consider the pairs plots above for 'MinTempAve', 'Elevation', and
'AmbVapPressAve'. Most of the VIFs from robust_vifs
exceed the standard
threshold. The partial correlations with the response from partial_cor
are a
type of pseudo-importance assessing the importance each variable does not share
with the others. Now we tune our Random Forest model across four mtry values.
set.seed(100) m <- mtry_compare(factor(LobaOreg) ~ ., data = lichen, sqrt = TRUE, mvec = c(1, 5, 19, 33), num_var = 7 ) m$gg_model_errors m$model_errors
According to the accuracy plot and table above, our best choice is when mtry is 19. However, the accuracy for the best model is only slightly better than the models with mtry set to 5 and 33. We now look at the variable importance metrics across the different models.
m$gg_var_imp_error
There are 3 variables to focus on. 'MinTempAve', 'Elevation', and 'AmbVapPressAve' were all shown to be highly correlated above. These variables appear to be the most importance variable when mtry is small. However, as mtry increases, the importance of 'Elevation' drops off a bit, and the importance of 'AmbVapPressAve' drops even more. After seeing these changes, a researcher might consider how these variables actually affect lichen presence. They would find that 'MinTempAve' informs freezing which directly contributes to lichen presence. They would also realize that 'Elevation' indirectly causes lichen presence since 'Elevation' drives 'MinTempAve'. 'AmbVapPressAve' can be assumed to be a byproduct of 'Elevation' and is not a feature that should have much of a causal impact on lichen presences. While it is highly predictive, it is not something a scientist would prescribe for inducing the response. In this example, as mtry increases, casual variables rise while collinear byproducts fall.
No solution is perfect, but mtry of 33 yields results that match the intuition about the effect our predictors have on the response.
We now take our selected model and build individual importance plots for it
using ggvip
.
g <- ggvip(m$rf33, num_var = 12)$both_vips
We have used the randomForestVIP
package to tune a model for prediction and with
superior importance values. This was accomplished by assessing variable
importance and accuracy metrics across the hyper-parameter mtry.
Any scripts or data that you put into this service are public.
Add the following code to your website.
For more information on customizing the embed code, read Embedding Snippets.