This document shows the basics of applying our Bayesian model-based
clustering/classification with joint batch correction in `R`

.
It shows how to generate some toy data, apply the model, assess
convergence and process outputs.

We simulate some data using the `generateBatchData`

function.

```
library(ggplot2)
library(batchmix)
# Data dimensions
N <- 600
P <- 4
K <- 5
B <- 7
# Generating model parameters
mean_dist <- 2.25
batch_dist <- 0.3
group_means <- seq(1, K) * mean_dist
batch_shift <- rnorm(B, mean = batch_dist, sd = batch_dist)
std_dev <- rep(2, K)
batch_var <- rep(1.2, B)
group_weights <- rep(1 / K, K)
batch_weights <- rep(1 / B, B)
dfs <- c(4, 7, 15, 60, 120)
my_data <- generateBatchData(
N,
P,
group_means,
std_dev,
batch_shift,
batch_var,
group_weights,
batch_weights,
type = "MVT",
group_dfs = dfs
)
```

This gives us a named list with two related datasets, the
`observed_data`

which includes batch effects and the
`corrected_data`

which is batch-free. It also includes
`group_IDs`

, a vector indicating class membership for each
item, `batch_IDs`

, which indicates batch of origin for each
item, and `fixed`

, which indicates which labels are observed
and fixed in the model. We pull these out of the names list in the
format that the modelling functions desire them.

Given some data, we are interested in modelling it. We assume here that the set of observed labels includes at least one example of each class in the data.

```
# Sampling parameters
R <- 1000
thin <- 50
n_chains <- 4
# Density choice
type <- "MVT"
# MCMC samples and BIC vector
mcmc_output <- runMCMCChains(
X,
n_chains,
R,
thin,
batch_vec,
type,
initial_labels = initial_labels,
fixed = fixed
)
```

We want to assess two things. First, how frequently the proposed parameters in the Metropolis-Hastings step are accepted:

Secondly, we want to asses how well our chains have converged. To do
this we plot the `complete_likelihood`

of each chain. This is
the quantity most relevant to a clustering/classification, being
dependent on the labels. The `observed_likelihood`

is
independent of labels and more relevant for density estimation.

We see that our chains disagree. We have to run them for more
iterations. We use the `continueChains`

function for
this.

```
R_new <- 9000
# Given an initial value for the parameters
new_output <- continueChains(
mcmc_output,
X,
fixed,
batch_vec,
R_new,
keep_old_samples = TRUE
)
```

To see if the chains better agree we re-plot the likelihood.

We also re-check the acceptance rates.

This looks like several of the chains agree by the 5,000th iteration.

We process the chains, acquiring point estimates of different quantities.

For multidimensional data we use a PCA plot.

```
chain_used <- processed_samples[[1]]
pc <- prcomp(X, scale = T)
pc_batch_corrected <- prcomp(chain_used$inferred_dataset)
plot_df <- data.frame(
PC1 = pc$x[, 1],
PC2 = pc$x[, 2],
PC1_bf = pc_batch_corrected$x[, 1],
PC2_bf = pc_batch_corrected$x[, 2],
pred_labels = factor(chain_used$pred),
true_labels = factor(true_labels),
prob = chain_used$prob,
batch = factor(batch_vec)
)
plot_df |>
ggplot(aes(
x = PC1,
y = PC2,
colour = true_labels,
alpha = prob
)) +
geom_point()
```

```
test_inds <- which(fixed == 0)
sum(true_labels[test_inds] == chain_used$pred[test_inds]) / length(test_inds)
```

`## [1] 0.8085106`