tidymodels / parsnip

A tidy unified interface to models
https://parsnip.tidymodels.org
Other
564 stars 78 forks source link

Inconsistency with the glmnet model ? #1124

Closed ZWael closed 1 month ago

ZWael commented 1 month ago

I was trying to use glmnet for feature selection.

I used the code below inspired from Julia Silge's blog post (many thanks to her) https://juliasilge.com/blog/lasso-the-office/ So I was selecting variables with 2 different lambda. If I am not mistaken, selected variable with the higher penalty should be included among the variables selected with the lowest penalty. which isn't the case in my data and reproduced in the toy data below.

The final model with finalize_workflow() should no longer variate ?

library(dplyr)
library(tidymodels)
library(vip)
library(glmnet) # for the toy dataset
data(QuickStartExample) # glmnet toy data
set.seed(1234)
# we add some vars and noise to simulate data with p>>>n
x <- replicate(8, {
  QuickStartExample$x+rnorm(2000)
})
QuickStartExample$x = cbind(QuickStartExample$x,
                            x[,,1],x[,,2],x[,,3],x[,,4],
                            x[,,5],x[,,6],x[,,7],x[,,8]
                            )
data=data.frame(y=QuickStartExample$y,QuickStartExample$x)

rm(QuickStartExample)
set.seed(1234)
split_init <- initial_split(data, strata = y)
train_d <- training(split_init)
test_d <- testing(split_init)

cv=vfold_cv(train_d,v=10,repeats = 3)
rec <- recipe(y ~ ., data = train_d) 

lasso_spec <- linear_reg(penalty = tune(), mixture = 1) %>%
  set_engine("glmnet")

wf <- workflow() %>%
  add_recipe(rec)%>%
  add_model(lasso_spec) 
res <- tune_grid(
  wf,
  resamples = cv,
  grid = 100
)
autoplot(res)

L1=res %>% 
  select_by_pct_loss(metric = "rmse",limit = 10, desc(penalty))
L2=res %>% 
  select_by_one_std_err(metric = "rmse",desc(penalty)) 
L1$penalty
#> [1] 0.2018086
L2$penalty
#> [1] 0.1004087
final_mod1 <- finalize_workflow(wf,L1)%>%
  fit(train_d)
final_mod2 <- finalize_workflow(wf,L2)%>%
  fit(train_d)
vars1=vip::vi(final_mod1%>%extract_fit_parsnip(),lambda =L1$penalty)
vars2=vip::vi(final_mod2%>%extract_fit_parsnip(),lambda =L2$penalty)
L1$penalty > L2$penalty  ## lambda L2 is less stringent so we expect to see selected vars by L1 included in the selected ones by L1
#> [1] TRUE
v1=vars1%>%filter(Importance!=0)%>%pull(Variable)
v2=vars2%>%filter(Importance!=0)%>%pull(Variable)

table(v1%in%v2)
#> 
#> FALSE  TRUE 
#>     2    25

v1
#>  [1] "X1"   "X14"  "X5"   "X6"   "X3"   "X40"  "X20"  "X143" "X160" "X140"
#> [11] "X111" "X26"  "X8"   "X75"  "X76"  "X163" "X120" "X65"  "X72"  "X146"
#> [21] "X171" "X29"  "X60"  "X148" "X74"  "X165" "X35"
v2
#>  [1] "X1"   "X14"  "X5"   "X40"  "X6"   "X3"   "X143" "X140" "X26"  "X111"
#> [11] "X8"   "X160" "X75"  "X163" "X65"  "X72"  "X120" "X76"  "X134" "X66" 
#> [21] "X35"  "X165" "X60"  "X177" "X56"  "X73"  "X59"  "X29"  "X146" "X24" 
#> [31] "X170" "X64"  "X159" "X148" "X141" "X54"  "X74"  "X67"

Created on 2024-05-24 with reprex v2.1.0

ZWael commented 1 month ago

Same result with some code modification in the intention to fit the model only once

final_mod <- finalize_workflow(wf,L1)%>%
  fit(train_d)
vars1=vip::vi(final_mod%>%extract_fit_parsnip(),lambda =L1$penalty)
vars2=vip::vi(final_mod%>%extract_fit_parsnip(),lambda =L2$penalty)

v1=vars1%>%filter(Importance!=0)%>%pull(Variable)
v2=vars2%>%filter(Importance!=0)%>%pull(Variable)

table(v1%in%v2)
#> 
#> FALSE  TRUE 
#>     2    25

Created on 2024-05-24 with reprex v2.1.0

simonpcouch commented 1 month ago

If I am not mistaken, selected variable with the higher penalty should be included among the variables selected with the lowest penalty.

This is a reasonable hypothesis, but turns out to actually be untrue! The path of coefficient estimates as the penalty varies does not guarantee that the variables included at a higher penalty will persist at a lower penalty; the process is not strictly nested. The actual set of variables with non-zero coefficients changes due to the interplay of penalty strength, variable correlation, and the optimization algorithm.

Here's an example with glmnet itself, no tidymodels involved:

library(dplyr)
library(vip)
library(glmnet) # for the toy dataset
#> Loading required package: Matrix
#> 
#> Attaching package: 'Matrix'
#> The following objects are masked from 'package:tidyr':
#> 
#>     expand, pack, unpack
#> Loaded glmnet 4.1-8
data(QuickStartExample) # glmnet toy data
set.seed(1234)
# we add some vars and noise to simulate data with p>>>n
x <- replicate(8, {
  QuickStartExample$x+rnorm(2000)
})
QuickStartExample$x = cbind(QuickStartExample$x,
                            x[,,1],x[,,2],x[,,3],x[,,4],
                            x[,,5],x[,,6],x[,,7],x[,,8]
)

glmnet_fit <- glmnet(QuickStartExample$x, QuickStartExample$y, alpha = 1)

vars1 = vip::vi(glmnet_fit, lambda = .2) %>% filter(Importance!=0) %>% pull(Variable)
vars2 = vip::vi(glmnet_fit, lambda = .1) %>% filter(Importance!=0) %>% pull(Variable)

table(vars1 %in% vars2)
#> 
#> FALSE  TRUE 
#>     2    15

Created on 2024-05-24 with reprex v2.1.0

ZWael commented 1 month ago

Thank you for the feedback

github-actions[bot] commented 3 weeks ago

This issue has been automatically locked. If you believe you have found a related problem, please file a new issue (with a reprex: https://reprex.tidyverse.org) and link to this issue.