I am getting a liittle bit lost who asked what here, inline. On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> > > Would it make sense to keep them as-is, and "pull them out", as > it were, should they prove to be wanted/needed by the other algo users? > I would hope it is of some help (especially math and in-memory prototype) for something to look back to. I would really try to plot it all anew, I found it usually helps my focus if I work with my own code from the ground up. So no, i would not just try to take it as is. Not without careful review. Also, if you noticed, the distributed version is quasi-algebraic, i.e., it contains direct Spark dependencies and code that relies on Spark. As such, it cannot be put into our decompositions package in mahout-math-scala module, where most of other distributed decompositions sit. I suspect it could be made 100% algebraic with current primitives available in Samsara. This is necessary condition to get it into mahout-math-scala. If it can't be done, then it has to live in mahout-spark module as one backend implementation only. > > > > > 3) On the feature extraction per R like formula can you elaborate more > here, are you talking about feature extraction using R like dataframes and > operators? > > > > > > > > > More later as I read through the papers. > I would really start there before anything else. (Moreover, this is the most fun part of all of it, as far as i am concerned:) ). Also my adapted formulas are attached to the issue like i mentioned. I would look thru the math if it is clear (for interpretation), if not let's discuss any questions. > >
