Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Expression handling in mlr #1576

Closed
wants to merge 28 commits into from
Closed

Expression handling in mlr #1576

wants to merge 28 commits into from

Conversation

jakob-r
Copy link
Member

@jakob-r jakob-r commented Mar 6, 2017

Reopening #1126 after a reverted merge

Still open issues:

  • n should not refer to the task size but maybe to the train set size.

Copy link
Member Author

@jakob-r jakob-r left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The problem is that with some wrappers we have train -> trainLearner -> train -> trainLearner calls. Are we using the right dictionary?

getTaskDictionary = function(task) {
#' getTaskDictionary(task, subset = NULL)
getTaskDictionary = function(task, subset = NULL) {
getSubsetSize = function(subset) if (is.logical(subset)) sum(subset) else length(subset)
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There was a PR and we now have checkTaskSubset. This might want to be used here.

@larskotthoff
Copy link
Member

What's the status here @jakob-r ?

@jakob-r
Copy link
Member Author

jakob-r commented Jul 21, 2017

The status was that it is quite hard to make sure that p and n are the actual values for number of features and number of observations because of all the wrappers and resampling going on. Some heavy lifting would be required here. So we will do it in mlrNG?

@larskotthoff
Copy link
Member

Maybe something for the next workshop?

@larskotthoff
Copy link
Member

Looks like this isn't going to happen. Unless somebody objects, I'll close this soon.

@jakob-r
Copy link
Member Author

jakob-r commented Dec 14, 2017

I guess you are right. But please do not delete the branch as it contains pretty much code that might be valuable to deal with expressions outside of mlr (in PH they are allowed at least)

@larskotthoff
Copy link
Member

Ok, closing and leaving branch.

@pat-s pat-s deleted the expression branch October 4, 2018 15:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants