Hi Ryan. I’m planning to implement the following functionality as a GSoC project: Measurements Accuracy Mean squared error Precision Recall F1 Validation Simple validation (splitting data once with validation set size specified by a user) K-fold cross validation Hyper-parameter tuning Grid search based tuning
Does it seem as a reasonable set of functionality? I have decided to include simple validation since it can be more appropriate when we have a lot of training data or when training is a time consuming process. Best Regards, Kirill Mishchenko > On 30 Mar 2017, at 00:28, Ryan Curtin <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 06:15:16PM +0500, Kirill Mishchenko wrote: >> Thanks for your answer, I was thinking about kind of the same solution. >> >> I have yet another question, an organisational one. There are several >> phases for evaluation during coding under the GSoC program. Namely, >> there are three: in the end of June, in the end of July and in the end >> of August. My question is should I prefer to plan coding in the way >> that I finish implementing some logical part of functionality by the >> start of an evaluation phase? >> >> For example, suppose I plan to implement functionality A1, A2, and B >> such that I need spend approximately a week for functionality A1, >> another week for A2, and 3 weeks for B. Also suppose that A1 and A2 >> correspond to one logical module, and B can be tested (and >> implemented) when either A1 or A2 is implemented (at least one of >> them). If I decide to implement them in the order A1, B, A2, I will >> likely finish B approximately by the start of the first evaluation >> phase. On the other side, If I decide to implement in the order A1, >> A2, B, I will likely be unable to finish B by the start of the first >> evaluation phase. So, what plaining in the described situation I >> should prefer? A more logical one (A1, A2, B) or evaluation phase >> oriented (A1, B, A2)? Or does it just depend on my preferences? > > Hi Kirill, > > That's up to you. From the side of the mentor, at least to me, as long > as you are making reasonable progress towards your project goals or > project timeline, it is no problem for the evaluation phase. Typically > the "midterm evaluation" doesn't line up with some particular goal, so > don't feel obligated to shape your proposal specifically around the > midterm date. > > Let me know if I can clarify anything. > > Thanks, > > Ryan > > -- > Ryan Curtin | "What? Facts?" > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | - Joe Cairo
_______________________________________________ mlpack mailing list [email protected] http://knife.lugatgt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mlpack
