Hi, It's fine that pulling it in as an experimental feature. I think that it will be helpful that pulling it it, because following work will be more managable when the code is tracked by subversion.
Thanks. 2012/9/12 Jörn Kottmann <kottm...@gmail.com> > Hello, > > should we pull in the patch and mark it as experimental? > Any opinions about that? > > Thanks, > Jörn > > > On 08/26/2012 06:43 AM, Hyosup Shim wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I've been working on implmenting QNTrainer(L-bfgs maxent parameter >> estimator) in recent few weeks. >> >> My first implementation on the issue gave me about 0.80 precision on >> train/test set of PerceptronPrepAttach unit test. >> Since other existing estimators in OpenNLP showed nearly same precision on >> that test set, I did submitted the patch. >> >> But on CONLL02 test set Jorn gave me, QNTrainer got dissappointing result. >> (less than 0.05 in precision, 0.30 in recall) >> >> I tried to fix it, and failed. Could anyone give me a clue? >> >> OPENNLP-338 >> <https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/OPENNLP-338<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENNLP-338> >> > >> >> >
