I would love more coordination. I tried to contribute some time ago to commons math, but was pretty soundly dismissed. My interest in helping did not survive the contact.
The major issue in integrating the two is the fairly limited Vector/Matrix class structure in commons math. In mahout, we need to be able to have special implementations so that we can drive parallel implementations easily. The benefits to Mahout, however, would be significant. Some of the distribution implementations would be very helpful, especially if they were rounded out with the concept sampling in addition to computing densities and cumulants. Having some basic linear algebra such as svd, eigenvectors and cholesky decompositions would also help significantly (commons math only provides LUD, if I remember, but together, the world is ours). For comparison, Mahout so far only has a linear solver based on Cramer's method which is a bit naïve. On 4/10/08 4:54 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > Currently at the ApacheCon Europe, Niall Pemberton pointed me to Isabel about > Mahout. We briefly talked together and I has a glance at your project, which I > didn't know before (sorry to have missed that). > > I am one of the commons-math committers and also the developer of the Mantissa > library (I think Grant Ingersoll knows this library, I recall his name as one > of > the brave souls who noticed and solved somes bugs in it). I am not a > mathematician per se, but may help on some math-related subjects. > > Some parts of commons-math may help you, and obviously some of your needs are > not addressed at all. It would be great if we could work together and improve > both projects by putting some algorithms where the better fit. > > Does this proposal sound reasonable to you ? > > Luc >
