[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60348] [octave forge] (statistics) logistic_regression

[Nicholas Jankowski]

Update of bug #60348 (project octave):

                  Status:                    None => Confirmed              
                 Release:                   6.1.0 => 7.2.0                  
        Operating System:               GNU/Linux => Any                    

    _______________________________________________________

Follow-up Comment #5:

closed the other logistic regression reports and pointed them here. 
additional testing shows that despite what the help text, most reference
material, and part of the source show, the output seems to fit -theta + x*beta
instead of what was stated earlier. 

the theta and beta are supposed to fit the data to a sigmoid function with
linear argument. a simple example:


x = [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9]';
y = [0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1]';


the above data should produce a sigmoid that is 0 to the left of 4 and rises
to 1 to the right of 5, with a smooth transition between. 

running:

[theta, beta] = logistic_regression(y,x)
theta = 98.193
beta = 28.047.


(y = theta + beta*x should be a line passing through the 0-to-1 transition.
with the data transition between 4 and 5, theta and beta above obviously don't
do that.)

the sigmoid function would normally be:

p(x) = 1/(1+exp(-(theta+beta*x))

plotting the four different sign options:

xtest = -10:0.1:10;
p_p_p = 1/(1+exp(-(theta+beta*xtest)); 
p_p_n = 1/(1+exp(-(theta+beta*xtest)); 
p_n_p = 1/(1+exp(-(theta+beta*xtest)); 
p_n_n = 1/(1+exp(-(theta+beta*xtest)); 

plot(xtest,p_p_p,'r',xtest,p_p_n,'b',xtest,p_n_p,'g',xtest,p_n_n,'k',)


plotting that you see that only the p_n_p function actually matches the
expected sigmoid behavior.  So the output from octaves function is producing a
constants for a p(x) = 1/(1+exp(-(-theta+beta*x)) model.

I've determined we should just ignore that gamma block at the end, as it's
irrelevant to the code. the subfunction really does look like it should follow
+theta + beta*x, so not sure yet why it doesn't.


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?60348>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/