#1




*ANSWER* Question 9
I wanted to confirm my answer with what others are getting.
I coded up the solution in MATLAB. I seem to have gotten somewhat lucky when I answered [d] for this question, since the ratio from one of the runs was 0.61, which is closer to 70% than 50%. However, I was rerunning the code after submission, and it seems that the result fluctuates around 0.6, sometimes dropping below that. My code follows. I would appreciate if anyone has insights as to where I am going wrong. It is most likely in the % Quadratic Programming % section, since PLA is lifted straight from the previous assignments I coded. Code:
clear all clc N = 100; Ntest = 1000; TRIALS = 1000; better = 0; sv_count = 0; for ii = 1:TRIALS % Generate random line p1 = 2*rand(2, 1)  1; p2 = 2*rand(2, 1)  1; % Possibility of divide by 0. Better to just use w0 + x1*w1 + x2*w2 form. slope = (p2(2)  p1(2)) / (p2(1)  p1(1)); intercept = p1(2)  slope*p1(1); line = [slope intercept]; % Generate random points % points are (x, y) coords points = 2*rand(N, 2)  1; y = sign(points(:, 2)  polyval(line, points(:, 1))); X = [ones(size(points, 1), 1) points]; % Add extra dimension % PLA wpla = zeros(3, 1); while true % Classify yfit = sign(X*wpla); combined = [X y]; bad = combined(yfit ~= y, :); if size(bad, 1) == 0 break; end i = randi(size(bad, 1), 1); wpla = wpla + bad(i, 4)*bad(i, [1:3])'; end % Quadratic programming X_svm = X(:, [2:3]); % Discard the constant term H = (y*y').*(X_svm*X_svm'); f = ones(N, 1)*1; A = y'; b = 0; lb = zeros(N, 1); ub = 1e6*ones(N, 1); options = optimset('Algorithm','interiorpointconvex','MaxIter',1500, 'Display', 'off'); alpha = quadprog(H, f, [], [], A, b, lb, ub, [], options); wquad = zeros(3, 1); wquad(2) = sum(X_svm(:, 1).*(alpha.*y)); wquad(3) = sum(X_svm(:, 2).*(alpha.*y)); % Get index of maximum alpha [maxval, maxind] = max(alpha); wquad(1) = 1/y(maxind)  X_svm(maxind, :)*wquad(2:3); % Eout points = 2*rand(Ntest, 2)  1; X = [ones(size(points, 1), 1) points]; y = 2*[points(:, 2) > polyval(line, points(:, 1))]  1; e_pla = sum(sign(X*wpla) ~= y)/size(X, 1); e_svm = sum(sign(X*wquad) ~= y)/size(X, 1); better = better + (e_svm < e_pla); % SVM sv_count = sv_count + sum(alpha > 0.001); % Floating point tolerance end (better/TRIALS) * 100 sv_count/TRIALS Last edited by Ziad Hatahet; 05272013 at 02:27 AM. Reason: Pasted code incorrectly. 
#2




Re: *ANSWER* Question 9
I had the same situation happened in Python. I'm pretty sure I checked everything for errors. The thing that I changed is, instead of doing
Code:
better = better + (e_svm < e_pla); Code:
better = better + (e_svm <= e_pla); 
#3




Re: *ANSWER* Question 9
Hi,
Sorry for being somewhat late (3 years?) in joining this discussion. I don't have Matlab to verify it, but I've run into a similar problem using Python and CVXOPT. The solution was to increase the number of test points from 10^3 to 10^4, assuming that's the method you use to calculate which result is closer to f. 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

