The evreg
package
implements ENNreg (Denœux 2022) (Denœux 2023a), a neural network model for
regression in which prediction uncertainty is quantified by Gaussian
random fuzzy numbers (GRFNs), a newly introduced family of random fuzzy
subsets of the real line that generalizes both Gaussian random variables
and Gaussian possibility distributions (Denœux
2023b). The output GRFN is constructed by combining GRFNs induced
by prototypes using a combination operator that generalizes Dempster’s
rule of Evidence Theory. The three output units indicate the most
plausible value of the response variable, variability around this value,
and epistemic uncertainty. The network is trained by minimizing a loss
function that generalizes the negative log-likelihood.
The evreg
package contains functions for training the
ENNreg model in batch or online mode, tuning hyperparameters by
cross-validation or the hold-out method, and making predictions. It also
contains utilities for making calculations with GRFNs (such as, e.g.,
computing the degrees of belief and plausibility of an interval, or
combining GRFNs).
The user is invited to read the papers cited in this vignette to get
familiar with the main concepts underlying epistemic random fuzzy sets
and evidential regression. These papers can be downloaded from the
author’s web site, at https://www.hds.utc.fr/~tdenoeux/. Here, we provide a
short guided tour of the main functions in the evreg
package.
You first need to install this package:
The following sections contain a brief introduction on the way to use
the main functions in the package evreg
for evidential
regression.
Let us start by writing a function that generates a dataset similar to that used in Section V.A of (Denœux 2023a):
gendat<-function(n){
x<-rep(0,n)
y<-x
for(i in 1:n){
u<-runif(1)
if(u<0.5) x[i]<-runif(1,-3,-1) else x[i]<-runif(1,1,4)
if(x[i]<0) y[i] <- sin(3*x[i])+ x[i]+ sqrt(0.01)* rnorm(1)
else y[i] <- sin(3*x[i])+ x[i]+ sqrt(0.3)* rnorm(1)
}
return(list(x=x,y=y))
}
We generate training and test sets of sizes, respectively, 400 and 1000:
Let us determine hyperparameters ξ and ρ using cross-validation, with batch training and K = 30 prototypes:
## $xi
## [1] 0
##
## $rho
## [1] 0.1
##
## $RMS
## [,1] [,2] [,3]
## [1,] 0.4972638 0.4592807 0.4526372
## [2,] 0.5038823 0.4536995 0.4593162
## [3,] 0.4864633 0.4603944 0.4695827
We can then train again the model using all the training data and the selected hyperparameters:
Let us now compute the predictions for regularly spaced inputs:
and let us compute belief intervals at levels 50%, 90% and 99%:
We can now plot the results using function ggplot
of
package `ggplot2
:
library(ggplot2)
int<-data.frame(lwr50=int50$INTBel[,1],upr50=int50$INTBel[,2],
lwr90=int90$INTBel[,1],upr90=int90$INTBel[,2],
lwr99=int99$INTBel[,1],upr99=int99$INTBel[,2],
x=xt,mux=pred$mux)
ggplot(data=as.data.frame(train), aes(x = x)) +
geom_point(aes(y = y)) +
geom_ribbon(data=int, aes(ymin = lwr50, ymax = upr50,x=x),alpha=0.2)+
geom_ribbon(data=int, aes(ymin = lwr90, ymax = upr90,x=x),alpha=0.15)+
geom_ribbon(data=int, aes(ymin = lwr99, ymax = upr99,x=x),alpha=0.1) +
geom_line(data=int,aes(x = x,y=mux),color="red",linewidth=1.5)
Let us now plot calibration curves for probabilistic and belief prediction intervals. We start by computing the predictions for the test set:
We then compute belief intervals with their coverage rates and plausibilities for 9 equally spaced levels between 0.1 and 0.9:
A<-seq(0.1,0.9,0.1)
nA<-length(A)
probbel<-rep(0,nA)
plbel<-rep(0,nA)
for(i in 1:nA){
int<-intervals(pred.tst,A[i],test$y)
probbel[i]<-int$coverage.Bel
plbel[i]<-int$Pl.Bel
}
Finally, we can plot the calibration curves:
oldpar <- par(pty="s")
plot(c(0,A,1),c(0,plbel,1),type="l",lwd=2,col="blue",xlab="",ylab="")
points(c(0,A,1),c(0,plbel,1),pch=21,bg="blue",cex=1.5)
lines(c(0,A,1),c(0,probbel,1),col="red",lwd=2)
points(c(0,A,1),c(0,probbel,1),pch=22,bg="red",cex=1.5)
abline(0,1,lty=2)
title(ylab="coverage rate", line=2.2, cex.lab=1.2)
title(xlab="level", line=2.2, cex.lab=1.2)
The evreg
package also contains functions for computing
with, and combining GRFNs. For instance, functions Bel
and
Pl
compute, respectively, the degrees of belief and
plausibility of intervals [x, y]. Let us illustrate
the use of these functions for plotting Bel([x − r, x + r])
and Pl([x − r, x + r])
as functions of x, for
different values of r. We
start by defining the GRFN:
We can then draw the “belief plot”:
x<-seq(-4,6,0.01)
plot(x,Bel(x-1,x+1,GRFN),type="l",xlab="x",ylab="Bel([x-r,x+r])",
lwd=2,ylim=c(0,1))
lines(x,Bel(x-0.5,x+0.5,GRFN),lwd=2,lty=2)
lines(x,Bel(x-0.1,x+0.1,GRFN),lwd=2,lty=3)
legend("topright",legend=c("r=1","r=0.5","r=0.1"),lty=c(1,2,3),bty="n")
and the “plausibility plot”:
plot(x,Pl(x-1,x+1,GRFN),type="l",xlab="x",ylab="Pl([x-r,x+r])",lwd=2,ylim=c(0,1))
lines(x,Pl(x-0.5,x+0.5,GRFN),lwd=2,lty=2)
lines(x,pl_contour(x,GRFN),lwd=2,lty=3)
legend("topright",legend=c("r=1","r=0.5","r=0"),lty=c(1,2,3),bty="n")
We can also plot the lower cumulative distribution function (cdf) F*(x) = Bel((−∞, x]) and the upper cdf F*(x) = Pl((−∞, x]) as follows:
plot(x,Bel(-Inf,x,GRFN),type="l",xlab="x",ylab="Lower/upper cdfs",lwd=2)
lines(x,Pl(-Inf,x,GRFN),type="l",lwd=2)
Finally, evreg
also has a function
combination_GRFN
that combines GRFNs using the generalized
product-intersection rule with hard or soft normalization. The rule with
soft normalization was introduced in (Denœux
2023b) and is recommended because it has very appealing
properties (the contour function of the combined random fuzzy sets is
still proportional to the product of the controur functions, a very
useful property of Dempster’s rule preserved with soft normalization).
However, the combination rule with hard normalization is simpler to
compute and is implemented in the ENNreg model (Denœux 2023a). Here is an illustration of the
use of function combination_GRFN
with the two normalization
schemes. Let us first define two GRFNs:
and combine them with soft and hard normalization:
GRFN12s<-combination_GRFN(GRFN1,GRFN2,soft=TRUE)
GRFN12h<-combination_GRFN(GRFN1,GRFN2,soft=FALSE)
print(GRFN12s$GRFN)
## $mu
## [1] 0.68
##
## $sig
## [1] 1.077033
##
## $h
## [1] 5
## $mu
## [1] 0.2
##
## $sig
## [1] 1.612452
##
## $h
## [1] 5
We can see that the results are quite different. Here is a plot of the contour functions of the initial and combined GRFNs:
x<-seq(-4,6,0.01)
plot(x,pl_contour(x,GRFN1),type="l",xlab="x",ylab="plausibility",lwd=2,
ylim=c(0,1),col="blue")
lines(x,pl_contour(x,GRFN2),lwd=2,lty=1,col="red")
lines(x,pl_contour(x,GRFN12s$GRFN),lwd=2,lty=2,col="green")
lines(x,pl_contour(x,GRFN12h$GRFN),lwd=2,lty=2,col="cyan")
legend("topright",legend=c("GRFN1","GRFN2","soft comb.","hard comb."),
lty=c(1,1,2,2),bty="n",col=c("blue","red","green","cyan"))