On 14 January 2014 23:58, Mathieu Blondel wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Joel Nothman wrote:
>
>>
>> I like this idea, broadly. I don't especially like the thought of
>> deprecating the scorer interface and parameter name already, but I think
>> this entails doing so. And the fac
On 14 January 2014 23:58, Mathieu Blondel wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Joel Nothman wrote:
>
>>
>> I like this idea, broadly. I don't especially like the thought of
>> deprecating the scorer interface and parameter name already, but I think
>> this entails doing so. And the fac
For the record, I've made some preliminary changes towards supporting
multiple metrics here:
https://github.com/mblondel/scikit-learn/commit/13bc90e35cb37cc4e054413057d8d7f0b29ef8a5
See my comments at the end of the page.
Mathieu
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Mathieu Blondel wrote:
>
>
>
>
- Mail original -
> De: "Adelina Grant"
> À: scikit-learn-general@lists.sourceforge.net
> Envoyé: Mardi 14 Janvier 2014 17:34:22
> Objet: [Scikit-learn-general] Scoring multiple test samples together
> rather than separately
> Hi
> I built a GMM classifier with the scikit learn package
Hi
I built a GMM classifier with the scikit learn package and would like to score
my model.
Training and test data consist of an array of quaternions, each quaternion
representing a motion frame, structured like this:
[ [1,2,3,4], [5,6,7,8], [5,4,3,2] ]
When I use the score function, it looks
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Joel Nothman wrote:
>
> I like this idea, broadly. I don't especially like the thought of
> deprecating the scorer interface and parameter name already, but I think
> this entails doing so. And the fact that it no longer has the same
> interface as estimator.score
> My previous proposition was mainly for cross_val_score for the time being.
I consider them almost one and the same in terms of the information users
want out of them. The fact that cross_val_score is a function, not a class,
makes it more difficult to change the return format, but changing the
d
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Joel Nothman wrote:
>
>
>- I like some ideas of your solution, in which you can have multiple
>objectives and hence best models, i.e. est.best_index_ could be an array,
>and the corresponding est.best_params_. Yet I think there are many cases
>where
