* Chalenger - Emacs - Python - Windows 7 64 bits

** Risk Analysis of the Space Shuttle: Pre-Challenger Prediction of Failure

 In this document we reperform some of the analysis provided in 
 /Risk Analysis of the Space Shuttle: Pre-Challenger Prediction of
 Failure/ by /Siddhartha R. Dalal, Edward B. Fowlkes, Bruce Hoadley/
 published in /Journal of the American Statistical Association/, Vol. 84,
 No. 408 (Dec., 1989), pp. 945-957 and available at
 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2290069. 

 On the fourth page of this article, they indicate that the maximum
 likelihood estimates of the logistic regression using only temperature
 are: *$\hat{\alpha}$ = 5.085* and *$\hat{\beta}$ = -0.1156* and their
 asymptotic standard errors are *$s_{\hat{\alpha}}$ = 3.052* and
 *$s_{\hat{\beta}}$ = 0.047*. The Goodness of fit indicated for this model was
 *$G^2$ = 18.086* with *21* degrees of freedom. Our goal is to reproduce
 the computation behind these values and the Figure 4 of this article,
 possibly in a nicer looking way.

*** Technical information on the computer on which the analysis is run

 We will be using the Python 3 language using the pandas, statsmodels,
 and numpy library.

 #+begin_src python :results output :session :exports both
def print_imported_modules():
    import sys
    for name, val in sorted(sys.modules.items()):
        if(hasattr(val, '__version__')): 
            print(val.__name__, val.__version__)
#        else:
#            print(val.__name__, "(unknown version)")
def print_sys_info():
    import sys
    import platform
    print(sys.version)
    print(platform.uname())

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import statsmodels.api as sm
import seaborn as sns

print_sys_info()
print_imported_modules()
 #+end_src

*** Loading and inspecting data

 Let's start by reading data.

  #+begin_src python :results output :session :exports both
data = pd.read_csv("https://app-learninglab.inria.fr/gitlab/moocrr-session1/moocrr-reproducibility-study/raw/master/data/shuttle.csv")
print(data)
  #+end_src

 We know from our previous experience on this data set that filtering
 data is a really bad idea. We will therefore process it as such.

  #+begin_src python :results file :session :var matplot_lib_filename=(org-babel-temp-file "figure" ".png") :exports both
%matplotlib inline
pd.set_option('mode.chained_assignment',None) # this removes a useless warning from pandas

data["Frequency"]=data.Malfunction/data.Count
data.plot(x="Temperature",y="Frequency",kind="scatter",ylim=[0,1])
plt.grid(True)
plt.tight_layout()

plt.savefig(matplot_lib_filename)
matplot_lib_filename
  #+end_src

*** Logistic regression

 Let's assume O-rings independently fail with the same probability
 which solely depends on temperature. A logistic regression should
 allow us to estimate the influence of temperature.

 #+begin_src python :results output :session :exports both
import statsmodels.api as sm

data["Success"]=data.Count-data.Malfunction
data["Intercept"]=1

logmodel=sm.GLM(data['Frequency'], data[['Intercept','Temperature']], 
                family=sm.families.Binomial(sm.families.links.logit)).fit()

print(logmodel.summary())
 #+end_src

The maximum likelyhood estimator of the intercept and of Temperature
 are thus *$\hat{\alpha}$ = 5.0850* and *$\hat{\beta}$ = -0.1156*. This *corresponds*
 to the values from the article of Dalal /et al./ The standard errors are 
 /$s_{\hat{\alpha}}$ = 7.477/ and /$s_{\hat{\beta}}$ = 0.115/, which is *different* from
 the *3.052* and *0.04702* reported by Dallal /et al./ The deviance is
 /3.01444/ with *21* degrees of freedom. I cannot find any value similar
 to the Goodness of fit (*$G^2$ = 18.086*) reported by Dalal /et al./ There
 seems to be something wrong. Oh I know, I haven't indicated that my
 observations are actually the result of 6 observations for each rocket
 launch. Let's indicate these weights (since the weights are always the
 same throughout all experiments, it does not change the estimates of
 the fit but it does influence the variance estimates).

 #+begin_src python :results output :session :exports both
logmodel=sm.GLM(data['Frequency'], data[['Intercept','Temperature']], 
                family=sm.families.Binomial(sm.families.links.logit),
                var_weights=data['Count']).fit()

print(logmodel.summary())
 #+end_src

 Good, now I have recovered the asymptotic standard errors
 *$s_{\hat{\alpha}}$ = 3.052* and *$s_{\hat{\beta}}$ = 0.047*. The Goodness of fit
 (Deviance) indicated for this model is *$G^2$ = 18.086* with *21* degrees
 of freedom (Df Residuals).

 *I have therefore managed to fully replicate the results of the Dalal
 /et al./ article*.

*** Predicting failure probability

 The temperature when launching the shuttle was 31°F. Let's try to
 estimate the failure probability for such temperature using our model:

 #+begin_src python :results file :session :var matplot_lib_filename=(org-babel-temp-file "figure" ".png") :exports both
%matplotlib inline
data_pred = pd.DataFrame({'Temperature': np.linspace(start=30, stop=90, num=121), 'Intercept': 1})
data_pred['Frequency'] = logmodel.predict(data_pred)
data_pred.plot(x="Temperature",y="Frequency",kind="line",ylim=[0,1])
plt.scatter(x=data["Temperature"],y=data["Frequency"])
plt.grid(True)

plt.savefig(matplot_lib_filename)
matplot_lib_filename
 #+end_src

 This figure is very similar to the Figure 4 of Dalal /et al./ *I have
 managed to replicate the Figure 4 of the Dalal /et al./ article.*

*** Computing and plotting uncertainty

 Following the documentation of
 [Seaborn](https://seaborn.pydata.org/generated/seaborn.regplot.html),
 I use regplot.

 #+begin_src python :results file :session :var matplot_lib_filename=(org-babel-temp-file "figure" ".png") :exports both
sns.set(color_codes=True)
plt.xlim(30,90)
plt.ylim(0,1)
sns.regplot(x='Temperature', y='Frequency', data=data, logistic=True)
plt.show()

plt.savefig(matplot_lib_filename)
matplot_lib_filename
 #+end_src

 **I think I have managed to correctly compute and plot the uncertainty
   of my prediction.** Although the shaded area seems very similar to
   [the one obtained by with
   R](https://app-learninglab.inria.fr/gitlab/moocrr-session1/moocrr-reproducibility-study/raw/5c9dbef11b4d7638b7ddf2ea71026e7bf00fcfb0/challenger.pdf),
   I can spot a few differences (e.g., the blue point for temperature
   63 is outside)... Could this be a numerical error ? Or a difference
   in the statistical method ? It is not clear which one is "right".
