Reputation: 1869
I have implemented a function to construct a distance matrix using the jaccard similarity:
import pandas as pd
entries = [
{'id':'1', 'category1':'100', 'category2': '0', 'category3':'100'},
{'id':'2', 'category1':'100', 'category2': '0', 'category3':'100'},
{'id':'3', 'category1':'0', 'category2': '100', 'category3':'100'},
{'id':'4', 'category1':'100', 'category2': '100', 'category3':'100'},
{'id':'5', 'category1':'100', 'category2': '0', 'category3':'100'}
]
df = pd.DataFrame(entries)
and the distance matrix with scipy
from scipy.spatial.distance import squareform
from scipy.spatial.distance import pdist, jaccard
res = pdist(df[['category1','category2','category3']], 'jaccard')
squareform(res)
distance = pd.DataFrame(squareform(res), index=df.index, columns= df.index)
The problem is that my result looks like this which seems to be false:
What am i missing? The similarity of 0 and 1 have to be maximum for example and the other values seem wrong too
Upvotes: 11
Views: 13157
Reputation: 1157
Using pairwise_distances
is much faster than pdist
for calculating a Large Jaccard distance matrix.
from sklearn.metrics.pairwise import pairwise_distances
pairwise_distances(df.values, metric="jaccard")
See root's answer to the original question
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 33833
Looking at the docs, the implementation of jaccard
in scipy.spatial.distance
is jaccard dissimilarity, not similarity. This is the usual way in which distance is computed when using jaccard as a metric. The reason for this is because in order to be a metric, the distance between the identical points must be zero.
In your code, the dissimilarity between 0 and 1 should be minimized, which it is. The other values look correct in the context of dissimilarity as well.
If you want similarity instead of dissimilarity, just subtract the dissimilarity from 1.
res = 1 - pdist(df[['category1','category2','category3']], 'jaccard')
Upvotes: 12