We covered a lot of information today and I'd like you to practice developing classification trees on your own. For each exercise, work through the problem, determine the result, and provide the requested interpretation in comments along with the code. The point is to build classifiers, not necessarily good classifiers (that will hopefully come later)


In [189]:
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import pydotplus
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
%matplotlib inline

from pandas.tools.plotting import scatter_matrix
from sklearn import datasets
from sklearn import tree
from sklearn.cross_validation import train_test_split
from sklearn import metrics
from sklearn.externals.six import StringIO

1. Load the iris dataset and create a holdout set that is 50% of the data (50% in training and 50% in test). Output the results (don't worry about creating the tree visual unless you'd like to) and discuss them briefly (are they good or not?)


In [190]:
iris = datasets.load_iris()
iris


Out[190]:
{'DESCR': 'Iris Plants Database\n\nNotes\n-----\nData Set Characteristics:\n    :Number of Instances: 150 (50 in each of three classes)\n    :Number of Attributes: 4 numeric, predictive attributes and the class\n    :Attribute Information:\n        - sepal length in cm\n        - sepal width in cm\n        - petal length in cm\n        - petal width in cm\n        - class:\n                - Iris-Setosa\n                - Iris-Versicolour\n                - Iris-Virginica\n    :Summary Statistics:\n\n    ============== ==== ==== ======= ===== ====================\n                    Min  Max   Mean    SD   Class Correlation\n    ============== ==== ==== ======= ===== ====================\n    sepal length:   4.3  7.9   5.84   0.83    0.7826\n    sepal width:    2.0  4.4   3.05   0.43   -0.4194\n    petal length:   1.0  6.9   3.76   1.76    0.9490  (high!)\n    petal width:    0.1  2.5   1.20  0.76     0.9565  (high!)\n    ============== ==== ==== ======= ===== ====================\n\n    :Missing Attribute Values: None\n    :Class Distribution: 33.3% for each of 3 classes.\n    :Creator: R.A. Fisher\n    :Donor: Michael Marshall (MARSHALL%PLU@io.arc.nasa.gov)\n    :Date: July, 1988\n\nThis is a copy of UCI ML iris datasets.\nhttp://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Iris\n\nThe famous Iris database, first used by Sir R.A Fisher\n\nThis is perhaps the best known database to be found in the\npattern recognition literature.  Fisher\'s paper is a classic in the field and\nis referenced frequently to this day.  (See Duda & Hart, for example.)  The\ndata set contains 3 classes of 50 instances each, where each class refers to a\ntype of iris plant.  One class is linearly separable from the other 2; the\nlatter are NOT linearly separable from each other.\n\nReferences\n----------\n   - Fisher,R.A. "The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems"\n     Annual Eugenics, 7, Part II, 179-188 (1936); also in "Contributions to\n     Mathematical Statistics" (John Wiley, NY, 1950).\n   - Duda,R.O., & Hart,P.E. (1973) Pattern Classification and Scene Analysis.\n     (Q327.D83) John Wiley & Sons.  ISBN 0-471-22361-1.  See page 218.\n   - Dasarathy, B.V. (1980) "Nosing Around the Neighborhood: A New System\n     Structure and Classification Rule for Recognition in Partially Exposed\n     Environments".  IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine\n     Intelligence, Vol. PAMI-2, No. 1, 67-71.\n   - Gates, G.W. (1972) "The Reduced Nearest Neighbor Rule".  IEEE Transactions\n     on Information Theory, May 1972, 431-433.\n   - See also: 1988 MLC Proceedings, 54-64.  Cheeseman et al"s AUTOCLASS II\n     conceptual clustering system finds 3 classes in the data.\n   - Many, many more ...\n',
 'data': array([[ 5.1,  3.5,  1.4,  0.2],
        [ 4.9,  3. ,  1.4,  0.2],
        [ 4.7,  3.2,  1.3,  0.2],
        [ 4.6,  3.1,  1.5,  0.2],
        [ 5. ,  3.6,  1.4,  0.2],
        [ 5.4,  3.9,  1.7,  0.4],
        [ 4.6,  3.4,  1.4,  0.3],
        [ 5. ,  3.4,  1.5,  0.2],
        [ 4.4,  2.9,  1.4,  0.2],
        [ 4.9,  3.1,  1.5,  0.1],
        [ 5.4,  3.7,  1.5,  0.2],
        [ 4.8,  3.4,  1.6,  0.2],
        [ 4.8,  3. ,  1.4,  0.1],
        [ 4.3,  3. ,  1.1,  0.1],
        [ 5.8,  4. ,  1.2,  0.2],
        [ 5.7,  4.4,  1.5,  0.4],
        [ 5.4,  3.9,  1.3,  0.4],
        [ 5.1,  3.5,  1.4,  0.3],
        [ 5.7,  3.8,  1.7,  0.3],
        [ 5.1,  3.8,  1.5,  0.3],
        [ 5.4,  3.4,  1.7,  0.2],
        [ 5.1,  3.7,  1.5,  0.4],
        [ 4.6,  3.6,  1. ,  0.2],
        [ 5.1,  3.3,  1.7,  0.5],
        [ 4.8,  3.4,  1.9,  0.2],
        [ 5. ,  3. ,  1.6,  0.2],
        [ 5. ,  3.4,  1.6,  0.4],
        [ 5.2,  3.5,  1.5,  0.2],
        [ 5.2,  3.4,  1.4,  0.2],
        [ 4.7,  3.2,  1.6,  0.2],
        [ 4.8,  3.1,  1.6,  0.2],
        [ 5.4,  3.4,  1.5,  0.4],
        [ 5.2,  4.1,  1.5,  0.1],
        [ 5.5,  4.2,  1.4,  0.2],
        [ 4.9,  3.1,  1.5,  0.1],
        [ 5. ,  3.2,  1.2,  0.2],
        [ 5.5,  3.5,  1.3,  0.2],
        [ 4.9,  3.1,  1.5,  0.1],
        [ 4.4,  3. ,  1.3,  0.2],
        [ 5.1,  3.4,  1.5,  0.2],
        [ 5. ,  3.5,  1.3,  0.3],
        [ 4.5,  2.3,  1.3,  0.3],
        [ 4.4,  3.2,  1.3,  0.2],
        [ 5. ,  3.5,  1.6,  0.6],
        [ 5.1,  3.8,  1.9,  0.4],
        [ 4.8,  3. ,  1.4,  0.3],
        [ 5.1,  3.8,  1.6,  0.2],
        [ 4.6,  3.2,  1.4,  0.2],
        [ 5.3,  3.7,  1.5,  0.2],
        [ 5. ,  3.3,  1.4,  0.2],
        [ 7. ,  3.2,  4.7,  1.4],
        [ 6.4,  3.2,  4.5,  1.5],
        [ 6.9,  3.1,  4.9,  1.5],
        [ 5.5,  2.3,  4. ,  1.3],
        [ 6.5,  2.8,  4.6,  1.5],
        [ 5.7,  2.8,  4.5,  1.3],
        [ 6.3,  3.3,  4.7,  1.6],
        [ 4.9,  2.4,  3.3,  1. ],
        [ 6.6,  2.9,  4.6,  1.3],
        [ 5.2,  2.7,  3.9,  1.4],
        [ 5. ,  2. ,  3.5,  1. ],
        [ 5.9,  3. ,  4.2,  1.5],
        [ 6. ,  2.2,  4. ,  1. ],
        [ 6.1,  2.9,  4.7,  1.4],
        [ 5.6,  2.9,  3.6,  1.3],
        [ 6.7,  3.1,  4.4,  1.4],
        [ 5.6,  3. ,  4.5,  1.5],
        [ 5.8,  2.7,  4.1,  1. ],
        [ 6.2,  2.2,  4.5,  1.5],
        [ 5.6,  2.5,  3.9,  1.1],
        [ 5.9,  3.2,  4.8,  1.8],
        [ 6.1,  2.8,  4. ,  1.3],
        [ 6.3,  2.5,  4.9,  1.5],
        [ 6.1,  2.8,  4.7,  1.2],
        [ 6.4,  2.9,  4.3,  1.3],
        [ 6.6,  3. ,  4.4,  1.4],
        [ 6.8,  2.8,  4.8,  1.4],
        [ 6.7,  3. ,  5. ,  1.7],
        [ 6. ,  2.9,  4.5,  1.5],
        [ 5.7,  2.6,  3.5,  1. ],
        [ 5.5,  2.4,  3.8,  1.1],
        [ 5.5,  2.4,  3.7,  1. ],
        [ 5.8,  2.7,  3.9,  1.2],
        [ 6. ,  2.7,  5.1,  1.6],
        [ 5.4,  3. ,  4.5,  1.5],
        [ 6. ,  3.4,  4.5,  1.6],
        [ 6.7,  3.1,  4.7,  1.5],
        [ 6.3,  2.3,  4.4,  1.3],
        [ 5.6,  3. ,  4.1,  1.3],
        [ 5.5,  2.5,  4. ,  1.3],
        [ 5.5,  2.6,  4.4,  1.2],
        [ 6.1,  3. ,  4.6,  1.4],
        [ 5.8,  2.6,  4. ,  1.2],
        [ 5. ,  2.3,  3.3,  1. ],
        [ 5.6,  2.7,  4.2,  1.3],
        [ 5.7,  3. ,  4.2,  1.2],
        [ 5.7,  2.9,  4.2,  1.3],
        [ 6.2,  2.9,  4.3,  1.3],
        [ 5.1,  2.5,  3. ,  1.1],
        [ 5.7,  2.8,  4.1,  1.3],
        [ 6.3,  3.3,  6. ,  2.5],
        [ 5.8,  2.7,  5.1,  1.9],
        [ 7.1,  3. ,  5.9,  2.1],
        [ 6.3,  2.9,  5.6,  1.8],
        [ 6.5,  3. ,  5.8,  2.2],
        [ 7.6,  3. ,  6.6,  2.1],
        [ 4.9,  2.5,  4.5,  1.7],
        [ 7.3,  2.9,  6.3,  1.8],
        [ 6.7,  2.5,  5.8,  1.8],
        [ 7.2,  3.6,  6.1,  2.5],
        [ 6.5,  3.2,  5.1,  2. ],
        [ 6.4,  2.7,  5.3,  1.9],
        [ 6.8,  3. ,  5.5,  2.1],
        [ 5.7,  2.5,  5. ,  2. ],
        [ 5.8,  2.8,  5.1,  2.4],
        [ 6.4,  3.2,  5.3,  2.3],
        [ 6.5,  3. ,  5.5,  1.8],
        [ 7.7,  3.8,  6.7,  2.2],
        [ 7.7,  2.6,  6.9,  2.3],
        [ 6. ,  2.2,  5. ,  1.5],
        [ 6.9,  3.2,  5.7,  2.3],
        [ 5.6,  2.8,  4.9,  2. ],
        [ 7.7,  2.8,  6.7,  2. ],
        [ 6.3,  2.7,  4.9,  1.8],
        [ 6.7,  3.3,  5.7,  2.1],
        [ 7.2,  3.2,  6. ,  1.8],
        [ 6.2,  2.8,  4.8,  1.8],
        [ 6.1,  3. ,  4.9,  1.8],
        [ 6.4,  2.8,  5.6,  2.1],
        [ 7.2,  3. ,  5.8,  1.6],
        [ 7.4,  2.8,  6.1,  1.9],
        [ 7.9,  3.8,  6.4,  2. ],
        [ 6.4,  2.8,  5.6,  2.2],
        [ 6.3,  2.8,  5.1,  1.5],
        [ 6.1,  2.6,  5.6,  1.4],
        [ 7.7,  3. ,  6.1,  2.3],
        [ 6.3,  3.4,  5.6,  2.4],
        [ 6.4,  3.1,  5.5,  1.8],
        [ 6. ,  3. ,  4.8,  1.8],
        [ 6.9,  3.1,  5.4,  2.1],
        [ 6.7,  3.1,  5.6,  2.4],
        [ 6.9,  3.1,  5.1,  2.3],
        [ 5.8,  2.7,  5.1,  1.9],
        [ 6.8,  3.2,  5.9,  2.3],
        [ 6.7,  3.3,  5.7,  2.5],
        [ 6.7,  3. ,  5.2,  2.3],
        [ 6.3,  2.5,  5. ,  1.9],
        [ 6.5,  3. ,  5.2,  2. ],
        [ 6.2,  3.4,  5.4,  2.3],
        [ 5.9,  3. ,  5.1,  1.8]]),
 'feature_names': ['sepal length (cm)',
  'sepal width (cm)',
  'petal length (cm)',
  'petal width (cm)'],
 'target': array([0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
        0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
        0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,
        1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,
        1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2,
        2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2,
        2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]),
 'target_names': array(['setosa', 'versicolor', 'virginica'], 
       dtype='<U10')}

In [193]:
x = iris.data[:,2:]
y = iris.target
dt = tree.DecisionTreeClassifier()

In [194]:
x_train, x_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(x,y,test_size=0.5,train_size=0.5)

In [195]:
dt = dt.fit(x_train,y_train)

In [196]:
def measure_performance(x,y,dt, show_accuracy=True, show_classification_report=True, show_confusion_matrix=True):
    y_pred=dt.predict(x)
    if show_accuracy:
        print("Accuracy:{0:.3f}".format(metrics.accuracy_score(y, y_pred)),"\n")
    if show_classification_report:
        print("Classification report")
        print(metrics.classification_report(y,y_pred),"\n")
    if show_confusion_matrix:
        print("Confusion matrix")
        print(metrics.confusion_matrix(y,y_pred),"\n")

In [197]:
measure_performance(x_test,y_test,dt)


Accuracy:0.947 

Classification report
             precision    recall  f1-score   support

          0       1.00      1.00      1.00        30
          1       0.93      0.93      0.93        28
          2       0.88      0.88      0.88        17

avg / total       0.95      0.95      0.95        75
 

Confusion matrix
[[30  0  0]
 [ 0 26  2]
 [ 0  2 15]] 

Nearly 95% accuracy, with 100% precision for the first species (0), and progressively less precision for the latter two species (1, 2) .

30 were classified as species 1, 26 as species 2, and 15 as species 3; though there were two falsely classified samples in both species 2 and species 3.

2. Redo the model with a 75% - 25% training/test split and compare the results. Are they better or worse than before? Discuss why this may be.


In [198]:
x_train, x_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(x,y,test_size=0.25,train_size=0.75)
dt = dt.fit(x_train,y_train)
y_pred=dt.predict(x_test)
measure_performance(x_test,y_test,dt)


Accuracy:0.974 

Classification report
             precision    recall  f1-score   support

          0       1.00      1.00      1.00        12
          1       0.93      1.00      0.97        14
          2       1.00      0.92      0.96        12

avg / total       0.98      0.97      0.97        38
 

Confusion matrix
[[12  0  0]
 [ 0 14  0]
 [ 0  1 11]] 

Over 97% accuracy, with again 100% precision for the first species (0), and a similar percent accuracy for the latter two species (1, 2) .

12 were classified as species 1, 14 as species 2, and 11 as species 3; and there was one falsely classified sample in species 3.

There are less total samples because the testing size is larger.

3. Load the breast cancer dataset (datasets.load_breast_cancer()) and perform basic exploratory analysis. What attributes to we have? What are we trying to predict?

For context of the data, see the documentation here: https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Breast+Cancer+Wisconsin+%28Diagnostic%29


In [199]:
bc = datasets.load_breast_cancer()
bc


Out[199]:
{'DESCR': 'Breast Cancer Wisconsin (Diagnostic) Database\n\nNotes\n-----\nData Set Characteristics:\n    :Number of Instances: 569\n\n    :Number of Attributes: 30 numeric, predictive attributes and the class\n\n    :Attribute Information:\n        - radius (mean of distances from center to points on the perimeter)\n        - texture (standard deviation of gray-scale values)\n        - perimeter\n        - area\n        - smoothness (local variation in radius lengths)\n        - compactness (perimeter^2 / area - 1.0)\n        - concavity (severity of concave portions of the contour)\n        - concave points (number of concave portions of the contour)\n        - symmetry \n        - fractal dimension ("coastline approximation" - 1)\n        \n        The mean, standard error, and "worst" or largest (mean of the three\n        largest values) of these features were computed for each image,\n        resulting in 30 features.  For instance, field 3 is Mean Radius, field\n        13 is Radius SE, field 23 is Worst Radius.\n        \n        - class:\n                - WDBC-Malignant\n                - WDBC-Benign\n\n    :Summary Statistics:\n\n    ===================================== ======= ========\n                                           Min     Max\n    ===================================== ======= ========\n    radius (mean):                         6.981   28.11\n    texture (mean):                        9.71    39.28\n    perimeter (mean):                      43.79   188.5\n    area (mean):                           143.5   2501.0\n    smoothness (mean):                     0.053   0.163\n    compactness (mean):                    0.019   0.345\n    concavity (mean):                      0.0     0.427\n    concave points (mean):                 0.0     0.201\n    symmetry (mean):                       0.106   0.304\n    fractal dimension (mean):              0.05    0.097\n    radius (standard error):               0.112   2.873\n    texture (standard error):              0.36    4.885\n    perimeter (standard error):            0.757   21.98\n    area (standard error):                 6.802   542.2\n    smoothness (standard error):           0.002   0.031\n    compactness (standard error):          0.002   0.135\n    concavity (standard error):            0.0     0.396\n    concave points (standard error):       0.0     0.053\n    symmetry (standard error):             0.008   0.079\n    fractal dimension (standard error):    0.001   0.03\n    radius (worst):                        7.93    36.04\n    texture (worst):                       12.02   49.54\n    perimeter (worst):                     50.41   251.2\n    area (worst):                          185.2   4254.0\n    smoothness (worst):                    0.071   0.223\n    compactness (worst):                   0.027   1.058\n    concavity (worst):                     0.0     1.252\n    concave points (worst):                0.0     0.291\n    symmetry (worst):                      0.156   0.664\n    fractal dimension (worst):             0.055   0.208\n    ===================================== ======= ========\n\n    :Missing Attribute Values: None\n\n    :Class Distribution: 212 - Malignant, 357 - Benign\n\n    :Creator:  Dr. William H. Wolberg, W. Nick Street, Olvi L. Mangasarian\n\n    :Donor: Nick Street\n\n    :Date: November, 1995\n\nThis is a copy of UCI ML Breast Cancer Wisconsin (Diagnostic) datasets.\nhttps://goo.gl/U2Uwz2\n\nFeatures are computed from a digitized image of a fine needle\naspirate (FNA) of a breast mass.  They describe\ncharacteristics of the cell nuclei present in the image.\nA few of the images can be found at\nhttp://www.cs.wisc.edu/~street/images/\n\nSeparating plane described above was obtained using\nMultisurface Method-Tree (MSM-T) [K. P. Bennett, "Decision Tree\nConstruction Via Linear Programming." Proceedings of the 4th\nMidwest Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science Society,\npp. 97-101, 1992], a classification method which uses linear\nprogramming to construct a decision tree.  Relevant features\nwere selected using an exhaustive search in the space of 1-4\nfeatures and 1-3 separating planes.\n\nThe actual linear program used to obtain the separating plane\nin the 3-dimensional space is that described in:\n[K. P. Bennett and O. L. Mangasarian: "Robust Linear\nProgramming Discrimination of Two Linearly Inseparable Sets",\nOptimization Methods and Software 1, 1992, 23-34].\n\nThis database is also available through the UW CS ftp server:\n\nftp ftp.cs.wisc.edu\ncd math-prog/cpo-dataset/machine-learn/WDBC/\n\nReferences\n----------\n   - W.N. Street, W.H. Wolberg and O.L. Mangasarian. Nuclear feature extraction \n     for breast tumor diagnosis. IS&T/SPIE 1993 International Symposium on \n     Electronic Imaging: Science and Technology, volume 1905, pages 861-870, \n     San Jose, CA, 1993. \n   - O.L. Mangasarian, W.N. Street and W.H. Wolberg. Breast cancer diagnosis and \n     prognosis via linear programming. Operations Research, 43(4), pages 570-577, \n     July-August 1995.\n   - W.H. Wolberg, W.N. Street, and O.L. Mangasarian. Machine learning techniques\n     to diagnose breast cancer from fine-needle aspirates. Cancer Letters 77 (1994) \n     163-171.\n',
 'data': array([[  1.80e+01,   1.04e+01,   1.23e+02, ...,   2.65e-01,   4.60e-01,
           1.19e-01],
        [  2.06e+01,   1.78e+01,   1.33e+02, ...,   1.86e-01,   2.75e-01,
           8.90e-02],
        [  1.97e+01,   2.12e+01,   1.30e+02, ...,   2.43e-01,   3.61e-01,
           8.76e-02],
        ..., 
        [  1.66e+01,   2.81e+01,   1.08e+02, ...,   1.42e-01,   2.22e-01,
           7.82e-02],
        [  2.06e+01,   2.93e+01,   1.40e+02, ...,   2.65e-01,   4.09e-01,
           1.24e-01],
        [  7.76e+00,   2.45e+01,   4.79e+01, ...,   0.00e+00,   2.87e-01,
           7.04e-02]]),
 'feature_names': array(['mean radius', 'mean texture', 'mean perimeter', 'mean area',
        'mean smoothness', 'mean compactness', 'mean concavity',
        'mean concave points', 'mean symmetry', 'mean fractal dimension',
        'radius error', 'texture error', 'perimeter error', 'area error',
        'smoothness error', 'compactness error', 'concavity error',
        'concave points error', 'symmetry error', 'fractal dimension error',
        'worst radius', 'worst texture', 'worst perimeter', 'worst area',
        'worst smoothness', 'worst compactness', 'worst concavity',
        'worst concave points', 'worst symmetry', 'worst fractal dimension'], 
       dtype='<U23'),
 'target': array([0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0,
        0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
        1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1,
        1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0,
        1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,
        1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1,
        0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1,
        0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1,
        0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1,
        0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0,
        0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0,
        0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1,
        1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1,
        1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0,
        1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1,
        1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1,
        0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1,
        1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,
        0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1,
        1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,
        0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1,
        1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1,
        1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,
        1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,
        1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1]),
 'target_names': array(['malignant', 'benign'], 
       dtype='<U9')}

The attributes (x) are listed near the top of the dataset, and include radius, texture, perimeter, etc. The target (y) is what we are trying to predict. Here, that is whether a tumor is malignant or benign.


In [200]:
x = bc.data[:,:] 
y = bc.target 
x_train, x_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(x,y,test_size=0.5,train_size=0.5)
dt = dt.fit(x_train,y_train)

In [201]:
def measure_performance(x,y,dt, show_accuracy=True, show_classification_report=True, show_confusion_matrix=True):
    y_pred=dt.predict(x)
    if show_accuracy:
        print("Accuracy:{0:.5f}".format(metrics.accuracy_score(y, y_pred)),"\n")
    if show_classification_report:
        print("Classification report")
        print(metrics.classification_report(y,y_pred),"\n")
    if show_confusion_matrix:
        print("Confusion matrix")
        print(metrics.confusion_matrix(y,y_pred),"\n")

In [202]:
measure_performance(x_test,y_test,dt)


Accuracy:0.92632 

Classification report
             precision    recall  f1-score   support

          0       0.98      0.83      0.90       112
          1       0.90      0.99      0.94       173

avg / total       0.93      0.93      0.93       285
 

Confusion matrix
[[ 93  19]
 [  2 171]] 

4. Using the breast cancer data, create a classifier to predict the type of seed. Perform the above hold out evaluation (50-50 and 75-25) and discuss the results.


In [203]:
x_train, x_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(x,y,test_size=0.25,train_size=0.75)
dt = dt.fit(x_train,y_train)

In [204]:
measure_performance(x_test,y_test,dt)


Accuracy:0.95105 

Classification report
             precision    recall  f1-score   support

          0       0.98      0.89      0.93        53
          1       0.94      0.99      0.96        90

avg / total       0.95      0.95      0.95       143
 

Confusion matrix
[[47  6]
 [ 1 89]] 

Over 95% accuracy, with rougly 95% precision. 7 out of 143 samples were misclassified.