Skip to content
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
18 changes: 16 additions & 2 deletions src/AnomalyDetectors/OneClassSVM.php
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ public function __construct(
new ExtensionIsLoaded('svm'),
new ExtensionMinimumVersion('svm', '0.2.0'),
])->check();


if ($nu < 0.0 or $nu > 1.0) {
throw new InvalidArgumentException('Nu must be between'
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -182,7 +183,14 @@ public function train(Dataset $dataset) : void
new SamplesAreCompatibleWithEstimator($dataset, $this),
])->check();

$this->model = $this->svm->train($dataset->samples());
$data = [];

foreach ($dataset->samples() as $sample) {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So did array_unshift() turn out to be faster?

Is it necessary to assign the sample to an intermediate variable or would

foreach ($dataset->samples() as $sample) {
    array_unshift($sample, 1);

    $data[] = $sample;
}

work here as well?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is faster yes. And the rest works also, please see the next commit

array_unshift($sample, 1);
$data[] = $sample;
}

$this->model = $this->svm->train($data);
}

/**
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -211,7 +219,13 @@ public function predictSample(array $sample) : int
throw new RuntimeException('Estimator has not been trained.');
}

return $this->model->predict($sample) !== 1.0 ? 0 : 1;
$sampleWithOffset = [];

foreach ($sample as $key => $value) {
$sampleWithOffset[$key + 1] = $value;
}

return $this->model->predict($sampleWithOffset) == 1 ? 0 : 1;

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I notice we are "inversing" the logic here i.e. 1 is now 0, 0 is now 1. Is that intentional?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, in fact in the one class mode of libsvm, the "normal" samples are to be labelled with the 1 class. And the anomalies, are to be labelled with -1. That's why !

}

/**
Expand Down