Machine Learning Engineer Nanodegree

Model Evaluation & Validation

Project: Predicting Boston Housing Prices

Welcome to the first project of the Machine Learning Engineer Nanodegree! In this notebook, some template code has already been provided for you, and you will need to implement additional functionality to successfully complete this project. You will not need to modify the included code beyond what is requested. Sections that begin with 'Implementation' in the header indicate that the following block of code will require additional functionality which you must provide. Instructions will be provided for each section and the specifics of the implementation are marked in the code block with a 'TODO' statement. Please be sure to read the instructions carefully!

In addition to implementing code, there will be questions that you must answer which relate to the project and your implementation. Each section where you will answer a question is preceded by a 'Question X' header. Carefully read each question and provide thorough answers in the following text boxes that begin with 'Answer:'. Your project submission will be evaluated based on your answers to each of the questions and the implementation you provide.

Note: Code and Markdown cells can be executed using the Shift + Enter keyboard shortcut. In addition, Markdown cells can be edited by typically double-clicking the cell to enter edit mode.

Getting Started

In this project, you will evaluate the performance and predictive power of a model that has been trained and tested on data collected from homes in suburbs of Boston, Massachusetts. A model trained on this data that is seen as a good fit could then be used to make certain predictions about a home — in particular, its monetary value. This model would prove to be invaluable for someone like a real estate agent who could make use of such information on a daily basis.

The dataset for this project originates from the UCI Machine Learning Repository. The Boston housing data was collected in 1978 and each of the 506 entries represent aggregated data about 14 features for homes from various suburbs in Boston, Massachusetts. For the purposes of this project, the following preprocessing steps have been made to the dataset:

  • 16 data points have an 'MEDV' value of 50.0. These data points likely contain missing or censored values and have been removed.
  • 1 data point has an 'RM' value of 8.78. This data point can be considered an outlier and has been removed.
  • The features 'RM', 'LSTAT', 'PTRATIO', and 'MEDV' are essential. The remaining non-relevant features have been excluded.
  • The feature 'MEDV' has been multiplicatively scaled to account for 35 years of market inflation.

Run the code cell below to load the Boston housing dataset, along with a few of the necessary Python libraries required for this project. You will know the dataset loaded successfully if the size of the dataset is reported.


In [1]:
# Import libraries necessary for this project
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
from sklearn.cross_validation import ShuffleSplit

# Import supplementary visualizations code visuals.py
import visuals as vs

# Pretty display for notebooks
%matplotlib inline

# Load the Boston housing dataset
data = pd.read_csv('housing.csv')
prices = data['MEDV']
features = data.drop('MEDV', axis = 1)
    
# Success
print "Boston housing dataset has {} data points with {} variables each.".format(*data.shape)


Boston housing dataset has 489 data points with 4 variables each.

Data Exploration

In this first section of this project, you will make a cursory investigation about the Boston housing data and provide your observations. Familiarizing yourself with the data through an explorative process is a fundamental practice to help you better understand and justify your results.

Since the main goal of this project is to construct a working model which has the capability of predicting the value of houses, we will need to separate the dataset into features and the target variable. The features, 'RM', 'LSTAT', and 'PTRATIO', give us quantitative information about each data point. The target variable, 'MEDV', will be the variable we seek to predict. These are stored in features and prices, respectively.

Implementation: Calculate Statistics

For your very first coding implementation, you will calculate descriptive statistics about the Boston housing prices. Since numpy has already been imported for you, use this library to perform the necessary calculations. These statistics will be extremely important later on to analyze various prediction results from the constructed model.

In the code cell below, you will need to implement the following:

  • Calculate the minimum, maximum, mean, median, and standard deviation of 'MEDV', which is stored in prices.
    • Store each calculation in their respective variable.

In [2]:
np.median(prices)


Out[2]:
438900.0

In [3]:
# TODO: Minimum price of the data
minimum_price = np.min(prices)

# TODO: Maximum price of the data
maximum_price = np.max(prices)

# TODO: Mean price of the data
mean_price = np.mean(prices)

# TODO: Median price of the data
median_price = np.median(prices)

# TODO: Standard deviation of prices of the data
std_price = np.std(prices)

# Show the calculated statistics
print "Statistics for Boston housing dataset:\n"
print "Minimum price: ${:,.2f}".format(minimum_price)
print "Maximum price: ${:,.2f}".format(maximum_price)
print "Mean price: ${:,.2f}".format(mean_price)
print "Median price ${:,.2f}".format(median_price)
print "Standard deviation of prices: ${:,.2f}".format(std_price)


Statistics for Boston housing dataset:

Minimum price: $105,000.00
Maximum price: $1,024,800.00
Mean price: $454,342.94
Median price $438,900.00
Standard deviation of prices: $165,171.13

Question 1 - Feature Observation

As a reminder, we are using three features from the Boston housing dataset: 'RM', 'LSTAT', and 'PTRATIO'. For each data point (neighborhood):

  • 'RM' is the average number of rooms among homes in the neighborhood.
  • 'LSTAT' is the percentage of homeowners in the neighborhood considered "lower class" (working poor).
  • 'PTRATIO' is the ratio of students to teachers in primary and secondary schools in the neighborhood.

Using your intuition, for each of the three features above, do you think that an increase in the value of that feature would lead to an increase in the value of 'MEDV' or a decrease in the value of 'MEDV'? Justify your answer for each.
Hint: Would you expect a home that has an 'RM' value of 6 be worth more or less than a home that has an 'RM' value of 7?

Answer: 'RM' is expected to be proportional to 'MEDV', i.e., as number of room increase, housing prices should increase as well. Conversely, 'LSTAT' and 'PTRATIO' is expected to be inversely proportional to 'MEDV', i.e., as the precentage of lower class residents increases or the ratio of student-to-teachers increases, housing prices should decrease.


Developing a Model

In this second section of the project, you will develop the tools and techniques necessary for a model to make a prediction. Being able to make accurate evaluations of each model's performance through the use of these tools and techniques helps to greatly reinforce the confidence in your predictions.

Implementation: Define a Performance Metric

It is difficult to measure the quality of a given model without quantifying its performance over training and testing. This is typically done using some type of performance metric, whether it is through calculating some type of error, the goodness of fit, or some other useful measurement. For this project, you will be calculating the coefficient of determination, R2, to quantify your model's performance. The coefficient of determination for a model is a useful statistic in regression analysis, as it often describes how "good" that model is at making predictions.

The values for R2 range from 0 to 1, which captures the percentage of squared correlation between the predicted and actual values of the target variable. A model with an R2 of 0 is no better than a model that always predicts the mean of the target variable, whereas a model with an R2 of 1 perfectly predicts the target variable. Any value between 0 and 1 indicates what percentage of the target variable, using this model, can be explained by the features. A model can be given a negative R2 as well, which indicates that the model is arbitrarily worse than one that always predicts the mean of the target variable.

For the performance_metric function in the code cell below, you will need to implement the following:

  • Use r2_score from sklearn.metrics to perform a performance calculation between y_true and y_predict.
  • Assign the performance score to the score variable.

In [4]:
from sklearn.metrics import r2_score

def performance_metric(y_true, y_predict):
    """ Calculates and returns the performance score between 
        true and predicted values based on the metric chosen. """
    
    # TODO: Calculate the performance score between 'y_true' and 'y_predict'
    score = r2_score(y_true, y_predict)
    
    # Return the score
    return score

Question 2 - Goodness of Fit

Assume that a dataset contains five data points and a model made the following predictions for the target variable:

True Value Prediction
3.0 2.5
-0.5 0.0
2.0 2.1
7.0 7.8
4.2 5.3

Would you consider this model to have successfully captured the variation of the target variable? Why or why not?

Run the code cell below to use the performance_metric function and calculate this model's coefficient of determination.


In [5]:
# Calculate the performance of this model
score = performance_metric([3, -0.5, 2, 7, 4.2], [2.5, 0.0, 2.1, 7.8, 5.3])
print "Model has a coefficient of determination, R^2, of {:.3f}.".format(score)


Model has a coefficient of determination, R^2, of 0.923.

Answer: Consdering that the true values and predictions appear to be visually correlated, and given the high R^2 score of 0.923, the model appears to have captured the general variation of the target variable. That said, this is question is somewhat ill-posed as we cannot speak to typical scores of this industry, and have no comparitive benchmarks. For example, cancer screenings are characteristically a difficult prediction problem, so a comparable R^2 value would be superb, but when trying to predict if 2016 Republican Presidential Candidate, Donald Trump, was going to say wild or disturbing nonsense on a given day, it would be relatively low.

Implementation: Shuffle and Split Data

Your next implementation requires that you take the Boston housing dataset and split the data into training and testing subsets. Typically, the data is also shuffled into a random order when creating the training and testing subsets to remove any bias in the ordering of the dataset.

For the code cell below, you will need to implement the following:

  • Use train_test_split from sklearn.cross_validation to shuffle and split the features and prices data into training and testing sets.
    • Split the data into 80% training and 20% testing.
    • Set the random_state for train_test_split to a value of your choice. This ensures results are consistent.
  • Assign the train and testing splits to X_train, X_test, y_train, and y_test.

In [6]:
from sklearn.cross_validation import train_test_split

# TODO: Shuffle and split the data into training and testing subsets
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(features, prices, test_size=0.2, random_state=1)

# Success
print "Training and testing split was successful."


Training and testing split was successful.

Question 3 - Training and Testing

What is the benefit to splitting a dataset into some ratio of training and testing subsets for a learning algorithm?
Hint: What could go wrong with not having a way to test your model?

Answer: Essentially overfitting; if the model is allowed to train on all available data, it's impossible to obtain a true accuracy estimate, or it's ability to generalize on new data.


Analyzing Model Performance

In this third section of the project, you'll take a look at several models' learning and testing performances on various subsets of training data. Additionally, you'll investigate one particular algorithm with an increasing 'max_depth' parameter on the full training set to observe how model complexity affects performance. Graphing your model's performance based on varying criteria can be beneficial in the analysis process, such as visualizing behavior that may not have been apparent from the results alone.

Learning Curves

The following code cell produces four graphs for a decision tree model with different maximum depths. Each graph visualizes the learning curves of the model for both training and testing as the size of the training set is increased. Note that the shaded region of a learning curve denotes the uncertainty of that curve (measured as the standard deviation). The model is scored on both the training and testing sets using R2, the coefficient of determination.

Run the code cell below and use these graphs to answer the following question.


In [7]:
# Produce learning curves for varying training set sizes and maximum depths
vs.ModelLearning(features, prices)


Question 4 - Learning the Data

Choose one of the graphs above and state the maximum depth for the model. What happens to the score of the training curve as more training points are added? What about the testing curve? Would having more training points benefit the model?
Hint: Are the learning curves converging to particular scores?

Answer: Let's consider the model with a max_depth of 3. As more points are added, the training and testing scores appear to asymptotically converge to 0.8. It is unlikely that adding more points will significantly improve the model, since the training and testing curves are approaching a similar asympototic value.

Complexity Curves

The following code cell produces a graph for a decision tree model that has been trained and validated on the training data using different maximum depths. The graph produces two complexity curves — one for training and one for validation. Similar to the learning curves, the shaded regions of both the complexity curves denote the uncertainty in those curves, and the model is scored on both the training and validation sets using the performance_metric function.

Run the code cell below and use this graph to answer the following two questions.


In [8]:
vs.ModelComplexity(X_train, y_train)


Question 5 - Bias-Variance Tradeoff

When the model is trained with a maximum depth of 1, does the model suffer from high bias or from high variance? How about when the model is trained with a maximum depth of 10? What visual cues in the graph justify your conclusions?
Hint: How do you know when a model is suffering from high bias or high variance?

Answer: Training the model with a maximum depth of 1, the model suffers from high bias. Conversely, training the model with a maximum depth of 10, the model suffers from high variance. With a maximum depth of 1, the training accuracy score is relatively poor, as it is effectively unable to model the underlying behavior, e.g., a simple linear relationship cannot model a non-linear trend. Conversely, at with a maximum depth of 10, the spread between the training and test (validation) scores have relatively improved, which suggests the that model has overfit with 10 levels, and cannot generalize to unseen (test) data.

Question 6 - Best-Guess Optimal Model

Which maximum depth do you think results in a model that best generalizes to unseen data? What intuition lead you to this answer?

Answer: A model with a maximum depth of 4 seems to strike a nice balance between the bias-variance tradeoff. Although maximum depths of 5 and 6 also seem to provide similar test performance, it is generally good practice to select a simpler model, if performance is comparable. One should only add complexity, if the improvement of performance can provide justification.


Evaluating Model Performance

In this final section of the project, you will construct a model and make a prediction on the client's feature set using an optimized model from fit_model.

What is the grid search technique and how it can be applied to optimize a learning algorithm?

Answer: Models (built from optimizing a function or "learning algorithms") are often tuned with various parameters that directly affect how they behave. For example, in the Lasso method, a single parameter is set that controls the bias-variance tradeoff by placing a weight (cost penalty) on the ability the model has to overfit data. The grid search technique is a structured manner of selecting a paramter that achieve some ideal model behavior. This is done through an automated sklearn function that abstracts the low-level details away from the user, which for a given feature range, and some increment, can find the optimal value.

Question 8 - Cross-Validation

What is the k-fold cross-validation training technique? What benefit does this technique provide for grid search when optimizing a model?
Hint: Much like the reasoning behind having a testing set, what could go wrong with using grid search without a cross-validated set?

Answer: K-fold cross validation allows all data to be used for the training and testing of the model. Unlike a hard train-test split that relegates a fixed number samples to either the train or test populations (effectively wasting valuable data for solely testing purposes), K-fold cross validation paritions the entire data population into k samples and then performs k model fit evaluations, each holding out a different sample, allows all data to be used for both model training and testing.

Implementation: Fitting a Model

Your final implementation requires that you bring everything together and train a model using the decision tree algorithm. To ensure that you are producing an optimized model, you will train the model using the grid search technique to optimize the 'max_depth' parameter for the decision tree. The 'max_depth' parameter can be thought of as how many questions the decision tree algorithm is allowed to ask about the data before making a prediction. Decision trees are part of a class of algorithms called supervised learning algorithms.

For the fit_model function in the code cell below, you will need to implement the following:

  • Use DecisionTreeRegressor from sklearn.tree to create a decision tree regressor object.
    • Assign this object to the 'regressor' variable.
  • Create a dictionary for 'max_depth' with the values from 1 to 10, and assign this to the 'params' variable.
  • Use make_scorer from sklearn.metrics to create a scoring function object.
    • Pass the performance_metric function as a parameter to the object.
    • Assign this scoring function to the 'scoring_fnc' variable.
  • Use GridSearchCV from sklearn.grid_search to create a grid search object.
    • Pass the variables 'regressor', 'params', 'scoring_fnc', and 'cv_sets' as parameters to the object.
    • Assign the GridSearchCV object to the 'grid' variable.

In [9]:
# TODO: Import 'make_scorer', 'DecisionTreeRegressor', and 'GridSearchCV'

from sklearn.tree import DecisionTreeRegressor
from sklearn.metrics import make_scorer
from sklearn import grid_search

def fit_model(X, y):
    """ Performs grid search over the 'max_depth' parameter for a 
        decision tree regressor trained on the input data [X, y]. """

    # TODO: Create a dictionary for the parameter 'max_depth' with a range from 1 to 10
    params = {'max_depth': np.arange(1,11)}

    # TODO: Create a decision tree regressor object
    regressor = DecisionTreeRegressor(random_state=0)
    
    # Create cross-validation sets from the training data
    cv_sets = ShuffleSplit(X.shape[0], n_iter = 10, test_size = 0.20, random_state = 0)

    # TODO: Transform 'performance_metric' into a scoring function using 'make_scorer' 
    scoring_fnc = make_scorer(performance_metric)

    # TODO: Create the grid search object
    grid = grid_search.GridSearchCV(regressor, param_grid=params, scoring=scoring_fnc, cv=cv_sets)

    # Fit the grid search object to the data to compute the optimal model
    grid = grid.fit(X, y)

    # Return the optimal model after fitting the data
    return grid.best_estimator_

Making Predictions

Once a model has been trained on a given set of data, it can now be used to make predictions on new sets of input data. In the case of a decision tree regressor, the model has learned what the best questions to ask about the input data are, and can respond with a prediction for the target variable. You can use these predictions to gain information about data where the value of the target variable is unknown — such as data the model was not trained on.

Question 9 - Optimal Model

What maximum depth does the optimal model have? How does this result compare to your guess in Question 6?

Run the code block below to fit the decision tree regressor to the training data and produce an optimal model.


In [10]:
# Fit the training data to the model using grid search
reg = fit_model(X_train, y_train)

# Produce the value for 'max_depth'
print "Parameter 'max_depth' is {} for the optimal model.".format(reg.get_params()['max_depth'])


Parameter 'max_depth' is 6 for the optimal model.

Answer: Maximum depth of 4 is shown as optional, and is equivalent to what was "guessed" earlier. Nice too see.

Question 10 - Predicting Selling Prices

Imagine that you were a real estate agent in the Boston area looking to use this model to help price homes owned by your clients that they wish to sell. You have collected the following information from three of your clients:

Feature Client 1 Client 2 Client 3
Total number of rooms in home 5 rooms 4 rooms 8 rooms
Neighborhood poverty level (as %) 17% 32% 3%
Student-teacher ratio of nearby schools 15-to-1 22-to-1 12-to-1

What price would you recommend each client sell his/her home at? Do these prices seem reasonable given the values for the respective features?
Hint: Use the statistics you calculated in the Data Exploration section to help justify your response.

Run the code block below to have your optimized model make predictions for each client's home.


In [11]:
# Produce a matrix for client data
client_data = [[5, 17, 15], # Client 1
               [4, 32, 22], # Client 2
               [8, 3, 12]]  # Client 3

# Show predictions
for i, price in enumerate(reg.predict(client_data)):
    print "Predicted selling price for Client {}'s home: ${:,.2f}".format(i+1, price)


Predicted selling price for Client 1's home: $424,935.00
Predicted selling price for Client 2's home: $284,200.00
Predicted selling price for Client 3's home: $933,975.00

In [12]:
snapshot = {}
snapshot["MEDV"] = [minimum_price, maximum_price, mean_price, median_price, std_price]
snapshot["RM"] = [np.min(features.RM), np.max(features.RM), np.mean(features.RM), np.median(features.RM), np.std(features.RM)]
snapshot["LSTAT"] = [np.min(features.LSTAT), np.max(features.LSTAT), np.mean(features.LSTAT), np.median(features.LSTAT), np.std(features.LSTAT)]
snapshot["PTRATIO"] = [np.min(features.PTRATIO), np.max(features.PTRATIO), np.mean(features.PTRATIO), np.median(features.PTRATIO), np.std(features.PTRATIO)]
string_list = ["min_val", "max_val", "mean", "median", "std"]

for key, value in snapshot.items():
    print(str(key) + ":")
    for i, val in enumerate(value):
        print(string_list[i] + " = " + str(val))
    print ""


RM:
min_val = 3.561
max_val = 8.398
mean = 6.24028834356
median = 6.185
std = 0.642991297354

PTRATIO:
min_val = 12.6
max_val = 22.0
mean = 18.5165644172
median = 19.1
std = 2.10910763761

MEDV:
min_val = 105000.0
max_val = 1024800.0
mean = 454342.944785
median = 438900.0
std = 165171.131544

LSTAT:
min_val = 1.98
max_val = 37.97
mean = 12.9396319018
median = 11.69
std = 7.07474478483

Answer:

Note: min, max, mean, median, and std values for each feature (RM, PTRATIO, LSTAT) and output (MEDV) are printed above. They are used to determine how much we should "trust" the prediction for each client.

Client 1:

  • 5 rooms is about one standard deviation below the overall population
  • 17% poverty is above, but within one standard deviation
  • 15-to-1 s-t ratio is more than one standard devaition below the overall population
  • \$424k price is quite close to the mean

Based on the above information, this prediction is well supported by training data; it wasn't a major outlier in any given feature and the final price is also indicative of this as well.

Client 2:

  • 4 rooms is 3~4 standard deviations below the overall population, and is close to the minimum of 3.5
  • 32% poverty is above, by about two standard deviations
  • 22-to-1 s-t ratio is the maximum value found in the population
  • \$284k price is more than one standard deviation below the mean

Based on the above information, this prediction is valid, but probably much less accurate. One of the feature values (s-t ratio) was an outlier, in addition to the others (rooms, poverty) being several deviations away from the mean.

Client 3:

  • 8 rooms is ~3 standard deviations above the overall population, and is close to the maximum of 8.4
  • 3% poverty is below, by about one standard deviations, and is close to the minimum of ~2%
  • 12-to-1 s-t ratio is the minimum value found in the population and is several standard deviations below the overall population
  • \$933k price is ~3 standard deviations above the population and is close to the overall maximum.

Based on the above information, this prediction has comparable accuracy to Client #2 - reasonable, but not as good as Client #1. The several near-outlier feature values are directly repsonsible for this.

Sensitivity

An optimal model is not necessarily a robust model. Sometimes, a model is either too complex or too simple to sufficiently generalize to new data. Sometimes, a model could use a learning algorithm that is not appropriate for the structure of the data given. Other times, the data itself could be too noisy or contain too few samples to allow a model to adequately capture the target variable — i.e., the model is underfitted. Run the code cell below to run the fit_model function ten times with different training and testing sets to see how the prediction for a specific client changes with the data it's trained on.


In [13]:
vs.PredictTrials(features, prices, fit_model, client_data)


Trial 1: $391,183.33
Trial 2: $424,935.00
Trial 3: $415,800.00
Trial 4: $420,622.22
Trial 5: $418,377.27
Trial 6: $411,931.58
Trial 7: $399,663.16
Trial 8: $407,232.00
Trial 9: $351,577.61
Trial 10: $413,700.00

Range in prices: $73,357.39

Question 11 - Applicability

In a few sentences, discuss whether the constructed model should or should not be used in a real-world setting.
Hint: Some questions to answering:

  • How relevant today is data that was collected from 1978?
  • Are the features present in the data sufficient to describe a home?
  • Is the model robust enough to make consistent predictions?
  • Would data collected in an urban city like Boston be applicable in a rural city?

Answer: No, for several reasons.

  • Current model is too simple. Houses are complex offerings that differ considerably from one to another. Our model based off 3 features cannot model all the other significant complexities (features, e.g., square footage, lot size, building condition, views, central heating/cooling) that go into pricing.
  • Current model is out of date. Now, more than ever, housing prices are time-dependant. Preditions made for a specific market just months ago may not generalize to current trends. Modeling with new data and adding a temporal component would be helpful.
  • Current model may have only generalized well (back in 1978) to an urban city with comparable demographics as Boston. If the model is expected to predict behavior for certain cases (rural towns), it must have been exposed to that kind of behavior during model fit.

Note: Once you have completed all of the code implementations and successfully answered each question above, you may finalize your work by exporting the iPython Notebook as an HTML document. You can do this by using the menu above and navigating to
File -> Download as -> HTML (.html). Include the finished document along with this notebook as your submission.