Want to share your content on R-bloggers? click here if you have a blog, or here if you don't.
1. Recap
The aim of this series of blog is to predict monthly admissions to Singapore public acute adult hospitals. EDA for the dataset was explored in past posts ( part 1 ; part 2 ). The admissions were treated as a hierarchical time series as every country has a hierarchical order to its public hospitals including Singapore. The levels are:
|– Cluster level (Clusters are a network of hospitals based on geographical regions. There are 3 health clusters in Singapore.)
|– Hospital level (There are 8 public acute adult hospitals.)
Admissions were forecasted at each level for Mar 21- Dec 21
library(tidyverse) library(tidymodels) library(timetk) library(modeltime) library(modeltime.ensemble) # dataset (training data and future forecast data and pre-processing recipes were done in the past post. cv too) The output was uploaded onto my github. url_datasets<-url("https://github.com/notast/hierarchical-forecasting/blob/main/5Data_CV.RData?raw=true") load(url_datasets) close(url_datasets) to_predictfuture %>% distinct(Date) ## # A tibble: 10 x 1 ## Date ## <date> ## 1 2021-03-01 ## 2 2021-04-01 ## 3 2021-05-01 ## 4 2021-06-01 ## 5 2021-07-01 ## 6 2021-08-01 ## 7 2021-09-01 ## 8 2021-10-01 ## 9 2021-11-01 ## 10 2021-12-01
The training dataset was from Jan 16 – Apr 20.
training(splits) %>% distinct(Date) %>% tail(10) ## # A tibble: 10 x 1 ## Date ## <date> ## 1 2019-07-01 ## 2 2019-08-01 ## 3 2019-09-01 ## 4 2019-10-01 ## 5 2019-11-01 ## 6 2019-12-01 ## 7 2020-01-01 ## 8 2020-02-01 ## 9 2020-03-01 ## 10 2020-04-01
The testing dataset was from May 20- Feb 21.
testing(splits) %>% distinct(Date) %>% tail(10) ## # A tibble: 10 x 1 ## Date ## <date> ## 1 2020-05-01 ## 2 2020-06-01 ## 3 2020-07-01 ## 4 2020-08-01 ## 5 2020-09-01 ## 6 2020-10-01 ## 7 2020-11-01 ## 8 2020-12-01 ## 9 2021-01-01 ## 10 2021-02-01
The admissions were forecasted using:
- Classical Approach:
- Traditional techniques e.g. bottoms up
- Newer techniques e.g. reconciliation were employed
- Machine Learning Approach
- The best combination of features to be used for machine learning were screened
- Several machine learning techniques were trial
- In this post, the best models (Random Forest and Prophet Boost) were retuned and ensemble model was created to achieve better performance
# tune grid and wf url_TgWf<- url("https://github.com/notast/hierarchical-forecasting/blob/main/5Retunning_objects.RData?raw=true") load(url_TgWf) close(url_TgWf) # finalized and fitted wf url_ffwf<- url("https://github.com/notast/hierarchical-forecasting/blob/main/5FFWf.RData?raw=true") load(url_ffwf) close(url_ffwf) # metric metrics_custom= metric_set( rmse, mae)
2 Tune again
Modelling and retuning is easy with tidymodels
Modelling
- Set up the model
- Add the recipe and model into a workflow
- Tune the workflow which in turn tunes parameters of the recipe and/or the model inside the workflow
- Finalize the workflow with the best tuned parameters
- Fit the finalized workflow with its best tuned recipe and best tuned model onto the whole training data.
Retuning
- Plot the current parameters against its corresponding
rmse
- Identify a range of parameters which correspond to better
rmse
and create an updated set of parameter information. - Retune the workflow with the updated set of parameter information.
- Finalized the updated workflow with the best retuned parameters.
- Fit the new finalized workflow onto the whole training data.
2.1 Retune Random Forest
rf_t %>% autoplot(metric="rmse") + geom_smooth(se=F) ## `geom_smooth()` using method = 'loess' and formula 'y ~ x'
param_rf2<- rf_wf %>% parameters() %>% update(trees=dials::trees(range=c(1600, 2500)), min_n= dials::min_n(range(2, 9))) set.seed(69) rf2_t<- tune_grid( object= rf_wf, resamples = folds, param_info = param_rf2, grid=20, metrics = metrics_custom) fun_fwf<- function(wf, t_wf){ finalize_workflow( x= wf, parameters= select_best(t_wf, "rmse")) %>% fit(splits_train) } rf2_f<-fun_fwf(rf_wf, rf2_t)
2.2 Retune Prophet boost
pb_t %>% autoplot(metric="rmse", "performance") + geom_smooth(se=F) ## `geom_smooth()` using method = 'loess' and formula 'y ~ x'
pb_t %>% autoplot(metric="rmse") + geom_smooth(se=F) ## `geom_smooth()` using method = 'loess' and formula 'y ~ x'
param_pb2<- pb_wf %>% parameters() %>% update(min_n= dials::min_n(range=c(10,30)), tree_depth= dials::tree_depth(range=c(3,10))) all_cores <- parallel::detectCores(logical = FALSE) library(doParallel) cl <- makePSOCKcluster(all_cores) registerDoParallel(cl) set.seed(69) pb2_t<- tune_bayes( object= pb_wf, resamples = folds, iter = 25, initial = 9, param_info = param_pb2, metrics = metrics_custom, control = control_bayes(no_improve = 25)) pb2_f<- fun_fwf(pb_wf, pb2_t) # save retuned finalized and fitted wf save(rf2_f, pb2_f, file = "6Retuned_FinalFitWf.RData")
2.3 Performance (after retuning)
Both Prophet Boost and Random Forest benefited from retuning. Prophet Boost benefited the most as XGB performs more optimally when its parameters are tweak.
e2_table<-modeltime_table(rf_f, pb_f,rf2_f, pb2_f) %>% update_model_description(1, "RF") %>% update_model_description(2, "PB") %>% update_model_description(3, "RF_retuned") %>% update_model_description(4, "PB_retuned") e2_cal<-e2_table %>% modeltime_calibrate(testing(splits)) e2_cal %>% modeltime_accuracy(metric_set = metrics_custom) %>% arrange(rmse, sort=T) ## # A tibble: 4 x 5 ## .model_id .model_desc .type rmse mae ## <int> <chr> <chr> <dbl> <dbl> ## 1 3 RF_retuned Test 545. 409. ## 2 1 RF Test 549. 410. ## 3 4 PB_retuned Test 945. 673. ## 4 2 PB Test 1137. 799.
3 Ensemble
Both tuned and original Random Forests were trial in the ensemble as the performance between the models were minimal. The retuned Prophet Boost was nominated to be the default Prophet Boost for the ensemble as its accuracy was markedly better than the original version. As Random Forest performed much better than Prophet Boost, the weightage given to Random Forest was at least 80%.
fun_ensemble<- function(M1, W1, W2){ ensemble_table<-e2_table %>% filter(.model_desc %in% c(M1, "PB_retuned")) %>% ensemble_weighted(loadings = c(W1, W2)) %>% modeltime_table() %>% modeltime_accuracy(testing(splits), metric_set = metrics_custom) ensemble_table %>% mutate(Model1_wt= paste0(M1,"::",W1 ), Model2_wt=paste0("PB_retuned::", W2)) %>% select(Model1_wt, Model2_wt, rmse, mae) } ensemble_rmse<-bind_rows(fun_ensemble("RF_retuned", 9,1), fun_ensemble("RF_retuned", 8,2), fun_ensemble("RF", 9,1), fun_ensemble("RF", 8,2))
3.1 Peformance (ensemble)
All the ensemble models performed better than its member models. Better performing ensemble models had a stronger bias to Random Forest.
ensemble_rmse%>% arrange(rmse,sort=T) ## # A tibble: 4 x 4 ## Model1_wt Model2_wt rmse mae ## <chr> <chr> <dbl> <dbl> ## 1 RF_retuned::9 PB_retuned::1 535. 412. ## 2 RF::9 PB_retuned::1 538. 412. ## 3 RF_retuned::8 PB_retuned::2 539. 421. ## 4 RF::8 PB_retuned::2 543. 423. e3_ensembled_table <- e2_table %>% filter(.model_desc %in% c("RF_retuned", "PB_retuned")) %>% ensemble_weighted(loadings = c(9, 1)) %>% modeltime_table()
4 Performance (individual levels)
The performance above was for all hierarchical levels, here the performance for each specific level was reviewed and visualized.
e3_ensembled_cal <-modeltime_calibrate(e3_ensembled_table, new_data = testing(splits))
modeltime_accuracy
and was unable to evaluate the accuracy for individual levels, a customised function was built.
e3_ensembled_fcast<- e3_ensembled_cal %>% modeltime_forecast(new_data = testing(splits), actual_data = to_train, keep_data = T) %>% filter(.key!="actual") %>% select(c(Date, Level, Name, Admission, .value, .conf_lo, .conf_hi)) fun_lvlacc<- function(L){ e3_ensembled_fcast %>% filter(Level==L) %>% metrics_custom(truth=.value, estimate=Admission) } fun_lvlplt<- function(DF, L, TT){ DF %>% filter(Level==L) %>% ggplot(aes(Date))+ geom_line(aes(y=Admission), col="blue")+ geom_line(aes(y=.value), col="red")+ geom_ribbon(aes(ymin=.conf_lo, ymax=.conf_hi), fill = "red", alpha = 0.1)+ facet_wrap(vars(Name), scales = "free_y") + labs(title = paste(TT)) }
Hospital
(fun_lvlacc("Hospital_id")) ## # A tibble: 2 x 3 ## .metric .estimator .estimate ## <chr> <chr> <dbl> ## 1 rmse standard 393. ## 2 mae standard 321. (fun_lvlplt(e3_ensembled_fcast, "Hospital_id", "Hospital level"))
Cluster level
(fun_lvlacc("Cluster_id")) ## # A tibble: 2 x 3 ## .metric .estimator .estimate ## <chr> <chr> <dbl> ## 1 rmse standard 657. ## 2 mae standard 528. (fun_lvlplt(e3_ensembled_fcast, "Cluster_id", "Cluster level"))
National level
(fun_lvlacc("National_id")) ## # A tibble: 2 x 3 ## .metric .estimator .estimate ## <chr> <chr> <dbl> ## 1 rmse standard 949. ## 2 mae standard 789. (fun_lvlplt(e3_ensembled_fcast, "National_id", "National level"))
5 The future
Below are the forecasted future admissions for Mar 21- Dec 21.
Future<-modeltime_refit(e3_ensembled_cal, to_train, control = control_refit(allow_par = T)) %>% modeltime_forecast(new_data = to_predictfuture, actual_data = to_train, keep_data = T) fun_lvlplt_Future<- function(L){ Future%>% filter_by_time(.start_date = last(Date) %-time% "24 month", .end_date = "end") %>% filter(Level==L) %>% group_by(Name) %>% plot_modeltime_forecast( .facet_ncol = 3, .conf_interval_show = TRUE, .interactive = F) + guides(x = guide_axis(angle = 30)) }
Hospital
Most of the hospital level forecast were relatively flat; perhaps, due to insufficient data compared to cluster and national level which had more observations from aggregation of subordinate levels.
fun_lvlplt_Future("Hospital_id")
Cluster
fun_lvlplt_Future("Cluster_id")
National
The forecast for cluster and national level appeared more plausible with some peaks and dips with an upward trend. Nonetheless, forecasting during this Covid period is challenging. Any forecast can be thrown off the rails as the situation is erratic and dynamic. For instance, the Covid infection rate was stable after Aug 20 but became more serious in May 21 with the Singapore government implementing stricter social distancing measures.
fun_lvlplt_Future("National_id")
6 KIV Plans
The modeltime
package has tremendously facilitated time series forcasting the tidyverse
way. The forecasting could have been improved by
- trying a greater variety of machine learning techniques offered by
tidymodels
- replacing
XGB
in Prophet Boost with other tree-based boost models likeCatboost
orlightGBM
- using deep learning.
Errors
A stacked ensembled was attempted but there was an error with resample predictions which was needed before feeding into ennsemble_model_spec
.
r_resamples<-splits_train %>% time_series_cv(date_var=Date, assess = 10, cumulative = T, skip = 5) ## Overlapping Timestamps Detected. Processing overlapping time series together using sliding windows. e_table<-modeltime_table(glm_f, mars_f, rf_f, xgb_f, pb_f) r_fitresamples <- e_table %>% modeltime_fit_resamples(r_resamples, control = control_resamples(allow_par = F, save_pred = T, verbose = T)) ## -- Fitting Resamples -------------------------------------------- ## * Model ID: 1 GLMNET ## i Slice1: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice1: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice2: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice2: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice3: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice3: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice4: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice4: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice5: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice5: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice6: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice6: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice7: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice7: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice8: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice8: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## * Model ID: 2 EARTH ## i Slice1: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice1: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice2: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice2: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice3: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice3: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice4: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice4: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice5: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice5: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice6: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice6: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice7: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice7: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice8: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice8: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## * Model ID: 3 RANGER ## i Slice1: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice1: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice2: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice2: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice3: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice3: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice4: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice4: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice5: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice5: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice6: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice6: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice7: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice7: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice8: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice8: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## * Model ID: 4 XGBOOST ## i Slice1: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice1: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice2: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice2: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice3: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice3: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice4: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice4: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice5: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice5: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice6: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice6: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice7: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice7: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice8: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice8: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## * Model ID: 5 PROPHET W/ XGBOOST ERRORS ## i Slice1: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice1: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice2: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice2: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice3: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice3: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice4: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice4: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice5: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice5: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice6: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice6: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice7: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice7: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## i Slice8: preprocessor 1/1 ## x Slice8: preprocessor 1/1: Error: Only one factor level in Covid: no ## 6.99 sec elapsed modeltime_resample_accuracy( r_fitresamples) ## Error: Only strings can be converted to symbols # snap shot of resamples #r_resamples %>% tk_time_series_cv_plan() %>% filter(Name== "CGH") %>% filter(.id %in% c("Slice1","Slice2","Slice3","Slice8")) %>% group_by(.id) %>% plot_time_series(.date_var = Date, .value= Admission, .interactive=F, .color_var= `.key`, .smooth=F)
The error with calculating the accuracy was likely due to missing predictions when the resample was fitted due to the Covid dummy variable. The peak period of Covid was only from Jan-Jul 20 thus there would have been plenty of samples with only no
Covid peak periods. One alternative was to omit Covid
as a predictor but as the pandemic still looms on, it was more appropriate to retain this variable when forecasting.
r_fitresamples$.resample_results[[1]]$.predictions ## [[1]] ## NULL ## ## [[2]] ## NULL ## ## [[3]] ## NULL ## ## [[4]] ## NULL ## ## [[5]] ## NULL ## ## [[6]] ## NULL ## ## [[7]] ## NULL ## ## [[8]] ## NULL r_fitresamples$.resample_results[[2]]$.predictions ## [[1]] ## NULL ## ## [[2]] ## NULL ## ## [[3]] ## NULL ## ## [[4]] ## NULL ## ## [[5]] ## NULL ## ## [[6]] ## NULL ## ## [[7]] ## NULL ## ## [[8]] ## NULL
R-bloggers.com offers daily e-mail updates about R news and tutorials about learning R and many other topics. Click here if you're looking to post or find an R/data-science job.
Want to share your content on R-bloggers? click here if you have a blog, or here if you don't.