[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-17219?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15445768#comment-15445768
]
Vincent commented on SPARK-17219:
---------------------------------
[~srowen] Hi all, per discussion, I thought we are going to handle NaN splits,
I mean to allow NaN exist in splits, rather than rejecting - although NaN
splits dont really make sense, I think one pro to process NaN splits is making
bucketizer more robust. If instead, we reject the NaN splits, it'd be better we
give an error msg to user that, such error is due to NaN value found in the
splits, in terms of complexity, rejecting or accepting NaN splits, they cost
the same.
what do you think?
> QuantileDiscretizer does strange things with NaN values
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SPARK-17219
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-17219
> Project: Spark
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: ML
> Affects Versions: 1.6.2
> Reporter: Barry Becker
>
> How is the QuantileDiscretizer supposed to handle null values?
> Actual nulls are not allowed, so I replace them with Double.NaN.
> However, when you try to run the QuantileDiscretizer on a column that
> contains NaNs, it will create (possibly more than one) NaN split(s) before
> the final PositiveInfinity value.
> I am using the attache titanic csv data and trying to bin the "age" column
> using the QuantileDiscretizer with 10 bins specified. The age column as a lot
> of null values.
> These are the splits that I get:
> {code}
> -Infinity, 15.0, 20.5, 24.0, 28.0, 32.5, 38.0, 48.0, NaN, NaN, Infinity
> {code}
> Is that expected. It seems to imply that NaN is larger than any positive
> number and less than infinity.
> I'm not sure of the best way to handle nulls, but I think they need a bucket
> all their own. My suggestions would be to include an initial NaN split value
> that is always there, just like the sentinel Infinities are. If that were the
> case, then the splits for the example above might look like this:
> {code}
> NaN, -Infinity, 15.0, 20.5, 24.0, 28.0, 32.5, 38.0, 48.0, Infinity
> {code}
> This does not seem great either because a bucket that is [NaN, -Inf] doesn't
> make much sense. Not sure if the NaN bucket counts toward numBins or not. I
> do think it should always be there though in case future data has null even
> though the fit data did not. Thoughts?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@spark.apache.org
