Running Various Models on Pima Indian Diabetesdata set

EDA was done various inferences found , now we will run various models and verify whether predictions match with the inferences.

As I have mentioned in the previous post , my focus is on the code and inference , which you can find in the python notebooks or R files.

R
Model Accuracy Precision Recall Kappa AUC
Decion Tree 73.48 75.33 82.48 0.4368 0.727
Naïve Bayes 75.22 82 80.39 0.4489 0.723
KNN 73.91 86.67 76.47 0.3894 0.683
Logistic Regression 76.09 82.67 81.05 0.4683 0.732
SVM Simple 73.91 86.67 76.47 0.3894 0.683
SVM 10 Folds 73.04 82.67 77.5 0.388 0.6883
SVM Linear 10 Folds 78.26 88.67 80.12 0.4974 0.7371
Random Forest 76.52 84 80.77 0.4733 0.733
XGBOOST 77.83 91.61 77.06 0.4981 0.843
Python
Model Accuracy Precision Recall Kappa AUC
Decion Tree 72.73 73 73 0.388 0.7
Naïve Bayes 80.51 80 81 0.5689 0.78
KNN 70.99 70 71 0.337 0.66
Logistic Regression 74.45 74 74 0.3956 0.68
SVM Simple 73.16 73 73 0.4007 0.69
Random Forest 76.62 77 77 0.48 0.73
XGBOOST 79.22 79 79 0.526 0.76

As we can see from the above tables XGBOOST was the clear winner for both the languages.

The Code for Python you can find at -> https://github.com/mmd52/Pima_Python

The code for R you can find at -> https://github.com/mmd52/Pima_R

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s