On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Andreas Mueller
<[email protected]>wrote:
> I'd very much like to get rid of liblinear, but we really have to be
> careful
> in the analysis. I'm pretty sure they benchmarked with a lot of sparse
> and dense
> data with lots of different amounts of noise, regularization,
> n_features, n_samples.
>
>
Actually, my implementation of the dual coordinate descent solver is a
straight Cython port of liblinear's C++ code with some modifications made
over time to support warm start ;-)
Replacing some selected solvers like the dual cd one seems feasible but
lightning doesn't support several solvers in liblinear. So, getting
entirely rid of liblinear doesn't seem possible.
Mathieu
PS: some authors use the term "dual coordinate ascent". The liblinear team
just uses "coordinate descent" since they minimize the dual with flipped
signs.
PPS: It would be nice if the liblinear team could open-source their test
suite ;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing Performance Central, a new site from SourceForge and
AppDynamics. Performance Central is your source for news, insights,
analysis and resources for efficient Application Performance Management.
Visit us today!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48897511&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Scikit-learn-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scikit-learn-general
