I extracting splitting rules from Greg Ridgeway's GBM 1.6-3.2 in R 2.15.2, so I can run classification in a production system outside of R. I have it working and verified for a dummy data set with all variable types (numeric, factor, ordered) and missing values, but in the titanic survivors data set the splitting rule for factors does not make sense. The attached code and log below explains the dilemma.
Also I tried tracing the predictions backwards (also in the log and code), but it doesn't make sense. The first record is a female and predict.gbm() gives values (around 0.0108) that land her on rule 7 on both trees. Then 7's parent is 5, and 5's parent is 0, but in each tree rule 0 has a different SplitCodePred. Andrew
______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
