[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-3272?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14125969#comment-14125969
 ] 

Joseph K. Bradley commented on SPARK-3272:
------------------------------------------

Hi Qiping,
Thanks for your patience; that PR is now merged.  It will be great to see this 
update!  I'm collaborating with Manish on [SPARK-1545] and hope to have a 
Random Forest PR ready before long (ETA Wed or Thu).  However, if you prep this 
or other updates before then, please go ahead and submit them, and I will be 
fine handling the merge.
Thanks for your help!
Joseph

> Calculate prediction for nodes separately from calculating information gain 
> for splits in decision tree
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SPARK-3272
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-3272
>             Project: Spark
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: MLlib
>    Affects Versions: 1.0.2
>            Reporter: Qiping Li
>             Fix For: 1.1.0
>
>
> In current implementation, prediction for a node is calculated along with 
> calculation of information gain stats for each possible splits. The value to 
> predict for a specific node is determined, no matter what the splits are.
> To save computation, we can first calculate prediction first and then 
> calculate information gain stats for each split.
> This is also necessary if we want to support minimum instances per node 
> parameters([SPARK-2207|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-2207]) 
> because when all splits don't satisfy minimum instances requirement , we 
> don't use information gain of any splits. There should be a way to get the 
> prediction value.  



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to