rf()
rf_spatial()
The package spatialRF facilitates fitting spatial regression models on regular or irregular data with Random Forest. It does so by generating spatial predictors that help the model “understand” the spatial structure of the training data with the end goal of minimizing the spatial autocorrelation of the model residuals and offering honest ariable importance scores.
Two main methods to generate spatial predictors from the distance matrix of the data points are implemented in the package:
The package is designed to minimize the amount of code required to fit a spatial model from a training dataset, the names of the response and the predictors, and a distance matrix, as the example below shows.
spatial.model <- spatialRF::rf_spatial( data = your_dataframe, dependent.variable.name = "your_response_variable", predictor.variable.names = c("predictor1", "predictor2", ..., "predictorN"), distance.matrix = your_distance_matrix )
spatialRF uses the fast and efficient ranger
package under the hood (Wright and Ziegler 2017). It also provides tools to identify potentially interesting variable interactions, tune random forest hyperparameters, assess model performance on spatially independent data folds, and examine the resulting models via importance plots, response curves, and response surfaces.
This package is reaching its final form, and big changes are not expected at this stage. However, it has many functions, and even though all them have been tested, only one dataset has been used for those tests. You will find bugs, and something will go wrong almost surely. If you have time to report bugs, please, do so in any of the following ways:
I will do my best to solve any issues ASAP!
The goal of spatialRF
is to help fitting explanatory spatial regression, where the target is to understand how a set of predictors and the spatial structure of the data influences response variable. Therefore, the spatial analyses implemented in the package can be applied to any spatial dataset, regular or irregular, with a sample size between ~100 and ~5000 cases (the higher end will depend on the RAM memory available), a quantitative or binary (values 0 and 1) response variable, and a more or less large set of predictive variables.
All functions but rf_spatial()
work with non-spatial data as well if the arguments distance.matrix
and distance.thresholds
are ignored. In such case, the number of training cases is no longer limited by the size of the distance matrix, and models can be trained with hundreds of thousands of rows.
However, when the focus is on fitting spatial models, and due to the nature of the spatial predictors used to represent the spatial structure of the training data, there are many things this package cannot do:
Predict model results over raster data.
Predict a model result over another region with a different spatial structure.
Work with “big data”, whatever that means.
Imputation or extrapolation (it can be done, but models based on spatial predictors are hardly transferable).
Take temporal autocorrelation into account (but this is something that might be implemented later on).
If after considering these limitations you are still interested, follow me, I will show you how it works.
There is a paper in the making about this package. In the meantime, if you find it useful for your academic work, please cite the ranger
package as well, it is the true core of spatialRF
!
Marvin N. Wright, Andreas Ziegler (2017). ranger: A Fast Implementation of Random Forests for High Dimensional Data in C++ and R. Journal of Statistical Software, 77(1), 1-17. doi:10.18637/jss.v077.i01
Blas M. Benito (2021). spatialRF: Easy Spatial Regression with Random Forest. R package version 1.1.0. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4745208. url: https://blasbenito.github.io/spatialRF/
The package is not yet in the CRAN repositories, so at the moment it must be installed from GitHub as follows. There are several branches in the repository:
main
: latest stable version (1.1.0 currently).development
: development version, usually very broken.v.1.0.9
: archived version.v.1.1.0
: archived version.remotes::install_github( repo = "blasbenito/spatialRF", ref = "main", force = TRUE )
##
## checking for file ‘/tmp/Rtmp2Meihj/remotes2b48057d12edf/BlasBenito-spatialRF-6ffb0ea/DESCRIPTION’ ... ✓ checking for file ‘/tmp/Rtmp2Meihj/remotes2b48057d12edf/BlasBenito-spatialRF-6ffb0ea/DESCRIPTION’
## ─ preparing ‘spatialRF’:
## checking DESCRIPTION meta-information ... ✓ checking DESCRIPTION meta-information
## ─ checking for LF line-endings in source and make files and shell scripts
## ─ checking for empty or unneeded directories
## ─ building ‘spatialRF_1.1.0.tar.gz’
##
##
library(spatialRF)
There are a few other libraries that will be useful during this tutorial.
The data required to fit random forest models with spatialRF
must fulfill several conditions:
NA
. You can check if there are NA records with sum(apply(df, 2, is.na))
. If the result is larger than 0, then just execute df <- na.omit(df)
to remove rows with empty cells.apply(df, 2, var) == 0
. Columns yielding TRUE should be removed.NaN
or Inf
when scaled. You can check each condition with sum(apply(scale(df), 2, is.nan))
and sum(apply(scale(df), 2, is.infinite))
. If higher than 0, you can find what columns are giving issues with sapply(as.data.frame(scale(df)), function(x)any(is.nan(x)))
and sapply(as.data.frame(scale(df)), function(x)any(is.infinite(x)))
. Any column yielding TRUE
will generate issues while trying to fit models with spatialRF
.The package includes an example dataset that fulfills the conditions mentioned above, named plant_richness_df
. It is a data frame with plant species richness and predictors for 227 ecoregions in the Americas, and a distance matrix among the ecoregion edges named, well, distance_matrix
.
data(plant_richness_df) data(distance_matrix) #names of the response variable and the predictors dependent.variable.name <- "richness_species_vascular" predictor.variable.names <- colnames(plant_richness_df)[5:21] #coordinates of the cases xy <- plant_richness_df[, c("x", "y")] #random seed for reproducibility random.seed <- 100
The response variable of plant_richness_df
is “richness_species_vascular”, that represents the total count of vascular plant species found on each ecoregion. The figure below shows the centroids of each ecoregion along with their associated value of the response variable.
world <- rnaturalearth::ne_countries( scale = "medium", returnclass = "sf" ) ggplot2::ggplot() + ggplot2::geom_sf( data = world, fill = "white" ) + ggplot2::geom_point( data = plant_richness_df, ggplot2::aes( x = x, y = y, color = richness_species_vascular ), size = 2.5 ) + ggplot2::scale_color_viridis_c( direction = -1, option = "F" ) + ggplot2::theme_bw() + ggplot2::labs(color = "Plant richness") + ggplot2::scale_x_continuous(limits = c(-170, -30)) + ggplot2::scale_y_continuous(limits = c(-58, 80)) + ggplot2::ggtitle("Plant richness of the American ecoregions") + ggplot2::xlab("Longitude") + ggplot2::ylab("Latitude")
The predictors (columns 5 to 21) represent diverse factors that may influence plant richness such as sampling bias, the area of the ecoregion, climatic variables, human presence and impact, topography, geographical fragmentation, and features of the neighbors of each ecoregion. The figure below shows the scatterplots of the response variable (y axis) against each predictor (x axis).
Note: Every plotting function in the package now allows changing the colors of their main features via specific arguments such as point.color
, line.color
, or fill.color
.
spatialRF::plot_training_df( data = plant_richness_df, dependent.variable.name = dependent.variable.name, predictor.variable.names = predictor.variable.names, ncol = 3, point.color = viridis::viridis(100, option = "F"), line.color = "gray30" )
The function plot_training_df_moran()
helps assessing the spatial autocorrelation of the response variable and the predictors across different distance thresholds. Low Moran’s I and p-values equal or larger than 0.05 indicate that there is no spatial autocorrelation for the given variable and distance threshold.
spatialRF::plot_training_df_moran( data = plant_richness_df, dependent.variable.name = dependent.variable.name, predictor.variable.names = predictor.variable.names, distance.matrix = distance_matrix, distance.thresholds = c( 0, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000 ), fill.color = viridis::viridis( 100, option = "F", direction = -1 ), point.color = "gray40" )
Random Forests already takes into account variable interactions of the form “variable a
becomes important when b
is higher than x”. However, Random Forest can also take advantage of variable interactions of the form a * b
, as they are commonly defined in regression models.
The function rf_interactions()
tests all possible interactions among predictors by using each one of them in a separate model, and suggesting the ones with the higher potential contribution to the model’s R squared and the higher relative importance (presented as a percentage of the maximum importance of a variable in the model).
interactions <- spatialRF::rf_interactions( data = plant_richness_df, dependent.variable.name = dependent.variable.name, predictor.variable.names = predictor.variable.names, seed = random.seed, verbose = FALSE )
kableExtra::kbl( interactions$selected, format = "html" ) %>% kableExtra::kable_paper("hover", full_width = F)
interaction.name | interaction.importance | interaction.r.squared.gain | |
---|---|---|---|
3 | human_population_X_bias_area_km2 | 96.591 | 0.0020859 |
5 | climate_bio1_average_X_bias_area_km2 | 88.100 | 0.0005355 |
7 | climate_hypervolume_X_bias_area_km2 | 79.640 | 0.0011140 |
patchwork::wrap_plots(interactions$plot)
Here rf_interactions()
suggests several candidate interactions ordered by their impact on the model. The function cannot say whether an interaction makes sense, and it is up to the user to choose wisely whether to select an interaction or not.
For the sake of the example, I will choose climate_bio1_average_X_bias_area_km2
, hypothesizing that ecoregions with higher area (bias_area_km2) and energy (represented by the annual temperature, climate_bio1_average) will have more species of vascular plants (this is just an example, many other rationales are possible when choosing between candidate interactions). The data required to add the interaction to the training data is in the output of rf_interactions()
.
#adding interaction column to the training data plant_richness_df[, "climate_bio1_average_X_bias_area_km2"] <- interactions$columns[, "climate_bio1_average_X_bias_area_km2"] #adding interaction name to predictor.variable.names predictor.variable.names <- c(predictor.variable.names, "climate_bio1_average_X_bias_area_km2")
The functions auto_cor()
and auto_vif()
help reduce redundancy in the predictors by using different criteria (bivariate R squared vs. variance inflation factor), while allowing the user to define an order of preference, which can be based either on domain expertise or on a quantitative assessment. The preference order is defined as a character vector in the preference.order
argument of both functions, and does not need to include the names of all predictors, but just the ones the user would like to keep in the analysis.
In the example below I give preference to the interaction suggested by rf_interactions()
over it’s two components, and prioritize climate over other types of predictors (any other choice would be valid, it just depends on the scope of the study). These rules are applied to both auto_cor()
and auto_vif()
, that are executed sequentially by using the %>%
pipe from the magrittr package.
Notice that I have set cor.threshold
and vif.threshold
to low values because the predictors in plant_richness_df
already have little multicollinearity,. The default values (cor.threshold = 0.75
and vif.threshold = 5
) should work well when combined together for any other set of predictors.
preference.order <- c( "climate_bio1_average_X_bias_area_km2", "climate_aridity_index_average", "climate_hypervolume", "climate_bio1_average", "climate_bio15_minimum", "bias_area_km2" ) predictor.variable.names <- spatialRF::auto_cor( x = plant_richness_df[, predictor.variable.names], cor.threshold = 0.6, preference.order = preference.order ) %>% spatialRF::auto_vif( vif.threshold = 2.5, preference.order = preference.order )
## [auto_cor()]: Removed variables: bias_area_km2, human_footprint_average
## [auto_vif()]: Removed variables: human_population
The output of auto_cor()
or auto_vif()
is of the class “variable_selection”, that can be used as input for the argument predictor.variable.names
of any modeling function within the package. An example is shown in the next section.
names(predictor.variable.names)
## [1] "vif" "selected.variables" "selected.variables.df"
The slot selected.variables
contains the names of the selected predictors.
predictor.variable.names$selected.variables
## [1] "climate_bio1_average_X_bias_area_km2"
## [2] "climate_aridity_index_average"
## [3] "climate_hypervolume"
## [4] "climate_bio1_average"
## [5] "climate_bio15_minimum"
## [6] "bias_species_per_record"
## [7] "climate_velocity_lgm_average"
## [8] "neighbors_count"
## [9] "neighbors_percent_shared_edge"
## [10] "human_population_density"
## [11] "topography_elevation_average"
## [12] "landcover_herbs_percent_average"
## [13] "fragmentation_cohesion"
## [14] "fragmentation_division"
## [15] "neighbors_area"
rf()
The function rf()
is a convenient wrapper for ranger::ranger()
used in every modelling function of the spatialRF package. It takes the training data, the names of the response and the predictors, and optionally (to assess the spatial autocorrelation of the residuals), the distance matrix, and a vector of distance thresholds (in the same units as the distances in distance_matrix).
These distance thresholds are the neighborhoods at which the model will check the spatial autocorrelation of the residuals. Their values may depend on the spatial scale of the data, and the ecological system under study.
Notice that here I plug the object predictor.variable.names
, output of auto_cor()
and auto_vif()
, directly into the predictor.variable.names
argument of the rf()
function to fit a random forest model.
model.non.spatial <- spatialRF::rf( data = plant_richness_df, dependent.variable.name = dependent.variable.name, predictor.variable.names = predictor.variable.names, distance.matrix = distance_matrix, distance.thresholds = c(0, 1500, 3000), seed = random.seed, verbose = FALSE )
The output is a list with several slots containing the information required to interpret the model. The information available in these slots can be plotted (functions named plot_...()
), printed to screen (print_...()
) and captured for further analyses (get_...()
).
The slot residuals (model.non.spatial$residuals
) stores the values of the residuals and the results of the normality and spatial autocorrelation tests. The best function to interrogate it is $$`plot_residuals_diagnostics()`$$.
spatialRF::plot_residuals_diagnostics( model.non.spatial, verbose = FALSE )
The upper panels show the results of the normality test (interpretation in the title), the middle panel shows the relationship between the residuals and the fitted values, important to understand the behavior of the residuals, and the lower panel shows the Moran’s I of the residuals across distance thresholds and their respective p-values.
The slot importance (model.non.spatial$variable.importance
) contains the variable importance scores. These can be plotted with plot_importance()
, printed with print_importance()
, and the dataframe retrieved with get_importance()
spatialRF::plot_importance( model.non.spatial, verbose = FALSE )
Variable importance represents the increase in mean error (computed on the out-of-bag data) across trees when a predictor is permuted. Values lower than zero would indicate that the variable performs worse than a random one.
If the argument scaled.importance = TRUE
is used, the variable importance scores are computed from the scaled data, making the importance scores easier to compare across different models.
The package randomForestExplainer
offers a couple of interesting options to deepen our understanding on variable importance scores. The first one is measure_importance()
, which analyzes the forest to find out the average minimum tree depth at which each variable can be found (mean_min_depth
), the number of nodes in which a variable was selected to make a split (no_of_nodes
), the number of times the variable was selected as the first one to start a tree (times_a_root
), and the probability of a variable to be in more nodes than what it would be expected by chance (p_value
).
importance.df <- randomForestExplainer::measure_importance( model.non.spatial, measures = c("mean_min_depth", "no_of_nodes", "times_a_root", "p_value") )
kableExtra::kbl( importance.df %>% dplyr::arrange(mean_min_depth) %>% dplyr::mutate(p_value = round(p_value, 4)), format = "html" ) %>% kableExtra::kable_paper("hover", full_width = F)
variable | mean_min_depth | no_of_nodes | times_a_root | p_value |
---|---|---|---|---|
climate_bio1_average | 2.2320 | 3023 | 76 | 0.0000 |
climate_bio1_average_X_bias_area_km2 | 2.3547 | 2893 | 81 | 0.0000 |
human_population_density | 2.5140 | 2979 | 64 | 0.0000 |
climate_hypervolume | 2.6067 | 2626 | 89 | 0.0029 |
neighbors_count | 2.9135 | 2030 | 68 | 1.0000 |
bias_species_per_record | 3.1947 | 2951 | 12 | 0.0000 |
neighbors_percent_shared_edge | 3.6054 | 2439 | 15 | 0.8641 |
neighbors_area | 3.6407 | 2349 | 10 | 0.9986 |
climate_aridity_index_average | 3.7755 | 2303 | 23 | 1.0000 |
topography_elevation_average | 3.8294 | 2452 | 13 | 0.7961 |
fragmentation_cohesion | 3.8429 | 2236 | 25 | 1.0000 |
climate_velocity_lgm_average | 3.9721 | 2308 | 19 | 0.9999 |
climate_bio15_minimum | 4.0881 | 2347 | 1 | 0.9988 |
landcover_herbs_percent_average | 4.1154 | 2349 | 2 | 0.9986 |
fragmentation_division | 4.5129 | 2087 | 2 | 1.0000 |
Random forest also computes the average increase in error when a variable is permuted for each case. This is named “local importance”, is stored in model.non.spatial$importance$local
as a data frame, and can be retrieved with get_importance_local()
.
local.importance <- spatialRF::get_importance_local(model.non.spatial)
The table below shows the first few records and columns. Larger values indicate larger average errors when estimating a case with the permuted version of the variable, so more important variables will show larger values.
kableExtra::kbl( round(local.importance[1:10, 1:5], 0), format = "html" ) %>% kableExtra::kable_paper("hover", full_width = F)
climate_bio1_average_X_bias_area_km2 | climate_aridity_index_average | climate_hypervolume | climate_bio1_average | climate_bio15_minimum |
---|---|---|---|---|
987 | -452 | 1091 | -512 | 566 |
1481 | 242 | 299 | 404 | 186 |
940 | 57 | -801 | 2272 | 895 |
391 | 644 | 979 | 1059 | 175 |
-1337 | -727 | 523 | 866 | 363 |
833 | 463 | 1441 | 596 | 540 |
1023 | 489 | 821 | 739 | 366 |
-530 | 325 | -769 | 471 | 576 |
1363 | 604 | -484 | 1656 | 263 |
917 | 229 | 1163 | 588 | 60 |
When case coordinates are joined with the local importance scores, it is possible to draw maps showing how variable importance changes over space.
#adding coordinates local.importance <- cbind( xy, local.importance )
#plot of climate_bio1_average p1 <- ggplot2::ggplot() + ggplot2::geom_sf( data = world, fill = "white" ) + ggplot2::geom_point( data = local.importance, ggplot2::aes( x = x, y = y, color = climate_bio1_average ) ) + ggplot2::scale_x_continuous(limits = c(-170, -30)) + ggplot2::scale_y_continuous(limits = c(-58, 80)) + ggplot2::scale_color_gradient2(low = "red", high = "blue") + ggplot2::theme_bw() + ggplot2::theme(legend.position = "bottom") + ggplot2::ggtitle("climate_bio1_average") + ggplot2::theme( plot.title = ggplot2::element_text(hjust = 0.5), legend.key.width = ggplot2::unit(1,"cm") ) + ggplot2::labs(color = "Importance") + ggplot2::xlab("Longitude") + ggplot2::ylab("Latitude") p2 <- ggplot2::ggplot() + ggplot2::geom_sf( data = world, fill = "white" ) + ggplot2::geom_point( data = local.importance, ggplot2::aes( x = x, y = y, color = human_population_density ) ) + ggplot2::scale_x_continuous(limits = c(-170, -30)) + ggplot2::scale_y_continuous(limits = c(-58, 80)) + ggplot2::scale_color_gradient2(low = "red", high = "blue") + ggplot2::theme_bw() + ggplot2::theme(legend.position = "bottom") + ggplot2::ggtitle("human_population_density") + ggplot2::theme( plot.title = ggplot2::element_text(hjust = 0.5), legend.key.width = ggplot2::unit(1,"cm") ) + ggplot2::labs(color = "Importance") + ggplot2::xlab("Longitude") + ggplot2::ylab("Latitude") p1 + p2
In these maps, values lower than 0 indicate that for a given record, the permuted version of the variable led to an accuracy score even higher than the one of the non-permuted variable, so again these negative values can be interpreted as “worse than chance”.
The variable importance scores are also used by the function plot_response_curves()
to plot partial dependence curves for the predictors (by default, only the ones with an importance score above the median). Building the partial dependency curve of a predictor requires setting the other predictors to their quantiles (0.1, 0.5, and 0.9 by default). This helps to understand how the response curve of a variable changes when all the other variables have low, centered, or high values. The function also allows to see the training data
spatialRF::plot_response_curves( model.non.spatial, quantiles = c(0.1, 0.5, 0.9), line.color = viridis::viridis( 3, #same number of colors as quantiles option = "F", end = 0.9 ), ncol = 3, show.data = TRUE )
Setting the argument quantiles
to 0.5 and setting show.data
to FALSE
(default optioin) accentuates the shape of the response curves.
spatialRF::plot_response_curves( model.non.spatial, quantiles = 0.5, ncol = 3 )
The package pdp
provides a general way to plot partial dependence plots.
pdp::partial( model.non.spatial, train = plant_richness_df, pred.var = "climate_bio1_average", plot = TRUE, grid.resolution = 200 )
If you need to do your own plots in a different way, the function get_response_curves()
returns a data frame with the required data.
reponse.curves.df <- spatialRF::get_response_curves(model.non.spatial)
kableExtra::kbl( head(reponse.curves.df, n = 10), format = "html" ) %>% kableExtra::kable_paper("hover", full_width = F)
response | predictor | quantile | model | predictor.name | response.name |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1478.935 | -183.8091 | 0.1 | 1 | climate_bio1_average | richness_species_vascular |
1478.935 | -181.5008 | 0.1 | 1 | climate_bio1_average | richness_species_vascular |
1478.935 | -179.1924 | 0.1 | 1 | climate_bio1_average | richness_species_vascular |
1478.935 | -176.8841 | 0.1 | 1 | climate_bio1_average | richness_species_vascular |
1478.935 | -174.5758 | 0.1 | 1 | climate_bio1_average | richness_species_vascular |
1478.935 | -172.2675 | 0.1 | 1 | climate_bio1_average | richness_species_vascular |
1478.935 | -169.9592 | 0.1 | 1 | climate_bio1_average | richness_species_vascular |
1478.935 | -167.6509 | 0.1 | 1 | climate_bio1_average | richness_species_vascular |
1478.935 | -165.3426 | 0.1 | 1 | climate_bio1_average | richness_species_vascular |
1478.935 | -163.0343 | 0.1 | 1 | climate_bio1_average | richness_species_vascular |
Interactions between two variables can be plotted with plot_response_surface()
spatialRF::plot_response_surface( model.non.spatial, a = "climate_bio1_average", b = "neighbors_count" )
This can be done as well with the pdp
package, that uses a slightly different algorithm to plot interaction surfaces.
The performance slot (in model.non.spatial$performance
) contains the values of several performance measures. It be printed via the function print_performance()
.
spatialRF::print_performance(model.non.spatial)
##
## Model performance
## - R squared (oob): 0.5680336
## - R squared (cor(obs, pred)^2): 0.9541156
## - Pseudo R squared (cor(obs, pred)):0.9767884
## - RMSE (oob): 2214.932
## - RMSE: 961.3883
## - Normalized RMSE: 0.277537
R squared (oob)
and RMSE (oob)
are the R squared of the model and its root mean squared error when predicting the out-of-bag data (fraction of data not used to train individual trees). From all the values available in the performance
slot, probably these the most honest ones, as it is the closer trying to get a performance estimate on independent data. However, out-of-bag data is not fully independent, and therefore will still be inflated, especially if the data is highly aggregated in space.R squared
and pseudo R squared
are computed from the observations and the predictions, and indicate to what extent model outcomes represent the input data. These values will usually be high the data is highly aggregated in space.RMSE
and its normalized version are computed via
root_mean_squared_error()
, and are linear with R squared
and pseudo R squared
.The function rf_evaluate() overcomes the limitations of the performance scores explained above by providing honest performance based on spatial cross-validation. The function separates the data into a number of spatially independent training and testing folds. Then, it fits a model on each training fold, predicts over each testing fold, and computes statistics of performance measures across folds. Let’s see how it works.
model.non.spatial <- spatialRF::rf_evaluate( model = model.non.spatial, xy = xy, #data coordinates repetitions = 30, #number of spatial folds training.fraction = 0.75, #training data fraction on each fold metrics = "r.squared", seed = random.seed, verbose = FALSE )
The function generates a new slot in the model named evaluation (model.non.spatial$evaluation
) with several objects that summarize the spatial cross-validation results.
names(model.non.spatial$evaluation)
## [1] "metrics" "training.fraction" "spatial.folds"
## [4] "per.fold" "per.fold.long" "per.model"
## [7] "aggregated"
The slot “spatial.folds”, produced by make_spatial_folds()
, contains the indices of the training and testing cases for each cross-validation repetition. The maps below show two sets of training and testing folds.
pr <- plant_richness_df[, c("x", "y")] pr$group.2 <- pr$group.1 <- "Training" pr[model.non.spatial$evaluation$spatial.folds[[1]]$testing, "group.1"] <- "Testing" pr[model.non.spatial$evaluation$spatial.folds[[25]]$testing, "group.2"] <- "Testing" p1 <- ggplot2::ggplot() + ggplot2::geom_sf(data = world, fill = "white") + ggplot2::geom_point(data = pr, ggplot2::aes( x = x, y = y, color = group.1 ), size = 2 ) + ggplot2::scale_color_viridis_d( direction = -1, end = 0.5, alpha = 0.8, option = "F" ) + ggplot2::theme_bw() + ggplot2::labs(color = "Group") + ggplot2::scale_x_continuous(limits = c(-170, -30)) + ggplot2::scale_y_continuous(limits = c(-58, 80)) + ggplot2::ggtitle("Spatial fold 1") + ggplot2::theme( legend.position = "none", plot.title = ggplot2::element_text(hjust = 0.5) ) + ggplot2::xlab("Longitude") + ggplot2::ylab("Latitude") p2 <- ggplot2::ggplot() + ggplot2::geom_sf(data = world, fill = "white") + ggplot2::geom_point(data = pr, ggplot2::aes( x = x, y = y, color = group.2 ), size = 2 ) + ggplot2::scale_color_viridis_d( direction = -1, end = 0.5, alpha = 0.8, option = "F" ) + ggplot2::theme_bw() + ggplot2::labs(color = "Group") + ggplot2::scale_x_continuous(limits = c(-170, -30)) + ggplot2::scale_y_continuous(limits = c(-58, 80)) + ggplot2::theme( plot.title = ggplot2::element_text(hjust = 0.5) ) + ggplot2::ggtitle("Spatial fold 25") + ggplot2::xlab("Longitude") + ggplot2::ylab("") p1 | p2
The information available in this new slot can be accessed with the functions print_evaluation()
, plot_evaluation()
, and get_evaluation()
.
spatialRF::plot_evaluation(model.non.spatial)
Full
represents the R squared of the model trained on the full dataset. Training
are the R-squared of the models fitted on the spatial folds (named Training
in the maps above), and Testing
are the R-squared of the same models on “unseen” data (data not used to train the model, named Testing
in the maps above). The median, median absolute deviation (MAD), minimum, and maximum R-squared values on the testing folds can be printed with print_evaluation()
.
spatialRF::print_evaluation(model.non.spatial)
##
## Spatial evaluation
## - Training fraction: 0.75
## - Spatial folds: 25
##
## Metric Median MAD Minimum Maximum
## r.squared 0.364 0.13 0.119 0.669
The model predictions are stored in the slot predictions, the arguments used to fit the model in ranger.arguments, and the model itself, used to predict new values (see code chunk below), is in the forest slot.
predicted <- stats::predict( object = model.non.spatial, data = plant_richness_df, type = "response" )$predictions
Random Forest is an stochastic algorithm that yields slightly different results on each run unless a random seed is set. This particularity has implications for the interpretation of variable importance scores. For example, in the plot above, the difference in importance between the predictors climate_hypervolume
and climate_bio1_average_X_bias_area_km2
could be just the result of chance. The function rf_repeat()
repeats a model execution and yields the distribution of importance scores of the predictors across executions.
model.non.spatial.repeat <- rf_repeat( model = model.non.spatial, repetitions = 30, seed = random.seed, verbose = FALSE )
Notice that the argument model
, present in several functions of the package, takes a fitted model as input. Such fitted model already has the training data, the names of the response and the predictors, the distance matrix, the distance thresholds, and the hyperparameters used to fit the model, all stored in the slot ranger.arguments
. All modeling functions in the package use the values stored in this slot to make it easy for the user to move a model from one function to the other.
names(model.non.spatial$ranger.arguments)
## [1] "data" "dependent.variable.name"
## [3] "predictor.variable.names" "distance.matrix"
## [5] "distance.thresholds" "num.trees"
## [7] "mtry" "importance"
## [9] "scaled.importance" "write.forest"
## [11] "probability" "min.node.size"
## [13] "max.depth" "replace"
## [15] "sample.fraction" "case.weights"
## [17] "class.weights" "splitrule"
## [19] "num.random.splits" "alpha"
## [21] "minprop" "split.select.weights"
## [23] "always.split.variables" "respect.unordered.factors"
## [25] "scale.permutation.importance" "local.importance"
## [27] "regularization.factor" "regularization.usedepth"
## [29] "keep.inbag" "inbag"
## [31] "holdout" "quantreg"
## [33] "oob.error" "num.threads"
## [35] "save.memory" "seed"
## [37] "classification"
The importance scores of a model fitted with rf_repeat()
are plotted as a violin plot, with the distribution of the importance scores of each predictor across repetitions.
spatialRF::plot_importance( model.non.spatial.repeat, verbose = FALSE )
The response curves of models fitted with rf_repeat()
can be plotted with plot_response_curves()
as well. The median prediction is shown with a thicker line.
spatialRF::plot_response_curves( model.non.spatial.repeat, quantiles = 0.5, ncol = 3 )
The function print_performance()
generates a summary of the performance scores across model repetitions. As every other function of the package involving repetitions, the provided stats are the median, and the median absolute deviation (mad).
spatialRF::print_performance(model.non.spatial.repeat)
##
## Model performance (median +/- mad)
## - R squared (oob): 0.571 +/- 0.0053
## - R squared (cor(obs, pred)^2): 0.951 +/- 0.0023
## - Pseudo R squared: 0.975 +/- 0.0012
## - RMSE (oob): 2207.678 +/- 13.609
## - RMSE: 972.239 +/- 15.5961
## - Normalized RMSE: 0.281 +/- 0.0045
rf_spatial()
The spatial autocorrelation of the residuals of a model like model.non.spatial
, measured with Moran’s I, can be plotted with plot_moran()
.
spatialRF::plot_moran( model.non.spatial, verbose = FALSE )
According to the plot, the spatial autocorrelation of the residuals of model.non.spatial
is highly positive for a neighborhood of 0 km, while it becomes non-significant (p-value > 0.05) at 1500 and 3000 km. To reduce the spatial autocorrelation of the residuals as much as possible, the non-spatial model can be transformed into a spatial model very easily with the function rf_spatial()
. This function is the true core of the package!
model.spatial <- spatialRF::rf_spatial( model = model.non.spatial, method = "mem.moran.sequential", #default method verbose = FALSE, seed = random.seed )
The plot below shows the Moran’s I of the residuals of the spatial model. It indicates that the residuals are not autocorrelated at a distance of 0 km any longer.
spatialRF::plot_moran( model.spatial, verbose = FALSE )
If we compare the variable importance plots of both models, we can see that the spatial model has an additional set of dots under the name “spatial_predictors”, and that the maximum importance of a few of these spatial predictors matches the importance of the most relevant non-spatial predictors.
p1 <- spatialRF::plot_importance( model.non.spatial, verbose = FALSE) + ggplot2::ggtitle("Non-spatial model") p2 <- spatialRF::plot_importance( model.spatial, verbose = FALSE) + ggplot2::ggtitle("Spatial model") p1 | p2
If we look at the ten most important variables in model.spatial
we will see that a few of them are spatial predictors. Spatial predictors are named spatial_predictor_X_Y
, where X
is the neighborhood distance at which the predictor has been generated, and Y
is the index of the predictor.
kableExtra::kbl( head(model.spatial$importance$per.variable, n = 10), format = "html" ) %>% kableExtra::kable_paper("hover", full_width = F)
variable | importance |
---|---|
spatial_predictor_0_2 | 1347.981 |
climate_bio1_average | 1333.954 |
climate_hypervolume | 1224.860 |
climate_bio1_average_X_bias_area_km2 | 1199.727 |
spatial_predictor_0_1 | 964.605 |
spatial_predictor_0_6 | 921.123 |
bias_species_per_record | 804.623 |
spatial_predictor_0_5 | 773.244 |
neighbors_count | 767.143 |
spatial_predictor_0_3 | 755.153 |
But what are spatial predictors? Spatial predictors, as shown below, are smooth surfaces representing neighborhood among records at different spatial scales. They are computed from the distance matrix in different ways. The ones below are the eigenvectors of the double-centered distance matrix of weights (a.k.a, Moran’s Eigenvector Maps). They represent the effect of spatial proximity among records, helping to represent biogeographic and spatial processes not considered by the non-spatial predictors.
spatial.predictors <- spatialRF::get_spatial_predictors(model.spatial) pr <- data.frame(spatial.predictors, plant_richness_df[, c("x", "y")]) p1 <- ggplot2::ggplot() + ggplot2::geom_sf(data = world, fill = "white") + ggplot2::geom_point( data = pr, ggplot2::aes( x = x, y = y, color = spatial_predictor_0_2 ), size = 2.5 ) + ggplot2::scale_color_viridis_c(option = "F") + ggplot2::theme_bw() + ggplot2::labs(color = "Eigenvalue") + ggplot2::scale_x_continuous(limits = c(-170, -30)) + ggplot2::scale_y_continuous(limits = c(-58, 80)) + ggplot2::ggtitle("Variable: spatial_predictor_0_2") + ggplot2::theme(legend.position = "bottom")+ ggplot2::xlab("Longitude") + ggplot2::ylab("Latitude") p2 <- ggplot2::ggplot() + ggplot2::geom_sf(data = world, fill = "white") + ggplot2::geom_point( data = pr, ggplot2::aes( x = x, y = y, color = spatial_predictor_0_5, ), size = 2.5 ) + ggplot2::scale_color_viridis_c(option = "F") + ggplot2::theme_bw() + ggplot2::labs(color = "Eigenvalue") + ggplot2::scale_x_continuous(limits = c(-170, -30)) + ggplot2::scale_y_continuous(limits = c(-58, 80)) + ggplot2::ggtitle("Variable: spatial_predictor_0_5") + ggplot2::theme(legend.position = "bottom") + ggplot2::xlab("Longitude") + ggplot2::ylab("") p1 | p2
The spatial predictors are included in the model one by one, in the order of their Moran’s I (spatial predictors with Moran’s I lower than 0 are removed). The selection procedure is performed by the function select_spatial_predictors_sequential()
, which finds the smaller subset of spatial predictors maximizing the model’s R squared, and minimizing the Moran’s I of the residuals. This is shown in the optimization plot below (dots linked by lines represent the selected spatial predictors).
p <- spatialRF::plot_optimization(model.spatial)
The model fitted above was based on the default hyperparameter values provided by ranger()
, and those might not be the most adequate ones for a given dataset. The function rf_tuning()
helps the user to choose sensible values for three Random Forest hyperparameters that are critical to model performance:
num.trees
: number of regression trees in the forest.mtry
: number of variables to choose from on each tree split.min.node.size
: minimum number of cases on a terminal node.Model tuning is done via spatial cross-validation, to ensure that the selected combination of hyperparameters maximizes the ability of the model to predict over data not used to train it. Warning: model tuning consumes a lot of computational resources, using it on large datasets might freeze your computer.
model.spatial.tuned <- rf_tuning( model = model.spatial, xy = xy, repetitions = 30, num.trees = c(500, 1000), mtry = seq( 2, length(model.spatial$ranger.arguments$predictor.variable.names), #number of predictors by = 9), min.node.size = c(5, 15), seed = random.seed, verbose = FALSE )
## Best hyperparameters:
## - num.trees: 500
## - mtry: 29
## - min.node.size: 5
## gain in r.squared: 0.01
The function rf_compare()
takes named list with as many models as the user needs to compare, and applies rf_evaluate()
to each one of them to compare their predictive performances across spatial folds.
comparison <- rf_compare( models = list( `Non-spatial` = model.non.spatial, `Spatial` = model.spatial, `Spatial tuned` = model.spatial.tuned ), xy = xy, repetitions = 30, training.fraction = 0.8, metrics = "r.squared", seed = random.seed )
x <- comparison$comparison.df %>% dplyr::group_by(model, metric) %>% dplyr::summarise(value = round(median(value), 3)) %>% dplyr::arrange(metric) %>% as.data.frame() colnames(x) <- c("Model", "Metric", "Median") kableExtra::kbl( x, format = "html" ) %>% kableExtra::kable_paper("hover", full_width = F)
Model | Metric | Median |
---|---|---|
Non-spatial | r.squared | 0.336 |
Spatial | r.squared | 0.184 |
Spatial tuned | r.squared | 0.223 |
This package can also perform binomial regression on response variables with zeros and ones. Let’s work on a quick example by turning the response variable of the previous models into a binomial one.
plant_richness_df$response_binomial <- ifelse( plant_richness_df$richness_species_vascular > 5000, 1, 0 )
The new response variable, response_binomial
, will have ones where richness_species_vascular > 5000
, and zeros otherwise. This would be equivalent to having the classes “high richness” (represented by the ones) and “low richness”, represented by the zeros. The binomial regression model would then have as objective to compute the probability of each ecoregion to belong to the “high richness” class.
There is something important to notice before moving forward though. The number of zeros in the new response variable is larger than the number of ones.
table(plant_richness_df$response_binomial)
##
## 0 1
## 165 62
This means that there is class imbalance, and under this scenario, any random forest model is going to get better at predicting the most abundant class, while in our case the “target” is the less abundant one. But the function rf()
is ready to deal with this issue. Let’s fit a model to see what am I talking about.
model.non.spatial <- spatialRF::rf( data = plant_richness_df, dependent.variable.name = "response_binomial", predictor.variable.names = predictor.variable.names, distance.matrix = distance_matrix, distance.thresholds = c(0, 1500, 3000), seed = random.seed, verbose = FALSE )
The function detects that the response variable is binary (using the function is_binary()
), and computes case weights for the ones and the zeros. These case weights are stored in the ranger.arguments
slot of the model, and are used to give preference to the cases with larger weights during the selection of the out-of-bag data (check the case.weights
argument in ranger::ranger()
). As a result, each individual tree in the forest is trained with a similar proportion of zeros and ones, which helps mitigate the class imbalance issue. This method is named weighted Random Forest, and is very well explained in this white paper that includes the father of Random Forest, Leo Breiman, as coauthor.
unique(model.non.spatial$ranger.arguments$case.weights)
## [1] 0.006060606 0.016129032
This model could be projected right away onto a raster stack with maps of the predictors, so, in fact, spatialRF
can be used to fit Species Distribution Models, when it actually wasn’t really designed with such a purpose in mind. And as an additional advantage, the model can be evaluated with rf_evaluate()
, which is way better than cross-validation via random data-splitting (this blog post explains explains why).
model.non.spatial <- spatialRF::rf_evaluate( model.non.spatial, xy = xy, metrics = "auc", #surprise! verbose = FALSE ) spatialRF::print_evaluation(model.non.spatial)
##
## Spatial evaluation
## - Training fraction: 0.75
## - Spatial folds: 25
##
## Metric Median MAD Minimum Maximum
## auc 0.885 0.059 0.674 0.959
Now, let’s see if this model needs spatial predictors (beyond this point, SDMs are no longer possible, because the spatial predictors cannot be represented as rasters, as they are mathematical representations of the distances among the training points).
spatialRF::plot_moran( model.non.spatial, verbose = FALSE )
The Moran’s I tests of the residuals shows that they are spatially autocorrelated for a neighborhood distance of 0 km. Let’s try to fix that with a spatial model.
model.spatial <- spatialRF::rf_spatial( model = model.non.spatial, verbose = FALSE, seed = random.seed ) spatialRF::plot_moran( model.spatial, verbose = FALSE )
Et voilá, the problem went away!
The take away message here is that you can work with a binomial response with spatialRF
, just as you would do with a continuous response, as long as it is represented with zeros and ones. Just remember that the class imbalance problem is tackled via case weights, and that predictive performance is also measured using the Area Under the ROC Curve (AUC).
You might not love Random Forest, but spatialRF
loves you, and as such, it gives you tools to generate spatial predictors for other models anyway.
The first step requires generating Moran’s Eigenvector Maps (MEMs) from the distance matrix. Here there are two options, computing MEMs for a single neighborhood distance with mem()
, and computing MEMs for several neighborhood distances at once with mem_multithreshold()
.
#single distance (0km by default) mems <- spatialRF::mem(distance.matrix = distance_matrix) #several distances mems <- spatialRF::mem_multithreshold( distance.matrix = distance_matrix, distance.thresholds = c(0, 1000, 2000) )
In either case the result is a data frame with Moran’s Eigenvector Maps (“just” the positive eigenvectors of the double-centered distance matrix).
kableExtra::kbl( head(mems[, 1:4], n = 10), format = "html" ) %>% kableExtra::kable_paper("hover", full_width = F)
spatial_predictor_0_1 | spatial_predictor_0_2 | spatial_predictor_0_3 | spatial_predictor_0_4 |
---|---|---|---|
0.0259217 | 0.0052203 | 0.0416969 | -0.0363324 |
0.0996679 | 0.0539713 | 0.1324480 | 0.3826928 |
0.0010477 | -0.0143046 | -0.0443602 | -0.0031386 |
0.0165695 | 0.0047991 | 0.0307457 | 0.0005170 |
0.0225761 | 0.0019595 | 0.0230368 | -0.0524239 |
0.0155252 | 0.0023742 | 0.0197953 | -0.0338956 |
0.0229197 | 0.0039860 | 0.0312561 | -0.0416697 |
-0.2436009 | -0.1155295 | 0.0791452 | 0.0189996 |
0.0150725 | -0.0158684 | -0.1010284 | 0.0095590 |
-0.1187381 | -0.0471879 | 0.0359881 | 0.0065211 |
But not all MEMs are made equal, and you will need to rank them by their Moran’s I. The function rank_spatial_predictors()
will help you do so.
mem.rank <- spatialRF::rank_spatial_predictors( distance.matrix = distance_matrix, spatial.predictors.df = mems, ranking.method = "moran" )
The output of rank_spatial_predictors()
is a list with three slots: “method”, a character string with the name of the ranking method; “criteria”, an ordered data frame with the criteria used to rank the spatial predictors; and “ranking”, a character vector with the names of the spatial predictors in the order of their ranking (it is just the first column of the “criteria” data frame). We can use this “ranking” object to reorder or mems
data frame.
mems <- mems[, mem.rank$ranking] #also: #mems <- mem.rank$spatial.predictors.df
From here, spatial predictors can be included in any model one by one, in the order of the ranking, until the spatial autocorrelation of the residuals becomes neutral, if possible. A little example with a linear model follows.
#model definition predictors <- c( "climate_aridity_index_average ", "climate_bio1_average", "bias_species_per_record", "human_population_density", "topography_elevation_average", "fragmentation_division" ) model.formula <- as.formula( paste( dependent.variable.name, " ~ ", paste( predictors, collapse = " + " ) ) ) #scaling the data model.data <- scale(plant_richness_df) %>% as.data.frame() #fitting the model m <- lm(model.formula, data = model.data) #Moran's I test of the residuals moran.test <- spatialRF::moran( x = residuals(m), distance.matrix = distance_matrix, verbose = FALSE ) moran.test$plot
According to the Moran’s I test, the model residuals show spatial autocorrelation. Let’s introduce MEMs one by one until the problem is solved.
#add mems to the data and applies scale() model.data <- data.frame( plant_richness_df, mems ) %>% scale() %>% as.data.frame() #initialize predictors.i predictors.i <- predictors #iterating through MEMs for(mem.i in colnames(mems)){ #add mem name to model definintion predictors.i <- c(predictors.i, mem.i) #generate model formula with the new spatial predictor model.formula.i <- as.formula( paste( dependent.variable.name, " ~ ", paste( predictors.i, collapse = " + " ) ) ) #fit model m.i <- lm(model.formula.i, data = model.data) #Moran's I test moran.test.i <- moran( x = residuals(m.i), distance.matrix = distance_matrix, verbose = FALSE ) #stop if no autocorrelation if(moran.test.i$test$interpretation == "No spatial correlation"){ break } }#end of loop #last moran test moran.test.i$plot
Now we can compare the model without spatial predictors m
and the model with spatial predictors m.i
.
comparison.df <- data.frame( Model = c("Non-spatial", "Spatial"), Predictors = c(length(predictors), length(predictors.i)), R_squared = round(c(summary(m)$r.squared, summary(m.i)$r.squared), 2), AIC = round(c(AIC(m), AIC(m.i)), 0), BIC = round(c(BIC(m), BIC(m.i)), 0), `Moran I` = round(c(moran.test$test$moran.i, moran.test.i$test$moran.i), 2) ) kableExtra::kbl( comparison.df, format = "html" ) %>% kableExtra::kable_paper("hover", full_width = F)
Model | Predictors | R_squared | AIC | BIC | Moran.I |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Non-spatial | 6 | 0.38 | 551 | 578 | 0.21 |
Spatial | 21 | 0.51 | 529 | 608 | 0.06 |
According to the model comparison, it can be concluded that the addition of spatial predictors, in spite of the increase in complexity, has improved the model. In any case, this is just a simple demonstration of how spatial predictors generated with functions of the spatialRF
package can still help you fit spatial models with other modeling methods.