Hi Andy, > > I'm using R (windows) version 2.1.1, randomForest version 4.15. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Never seen such a version... Ooops! I meant 4.5-15 > > I then save each tree to a file so I can combine them all > > afterwards. There are no memory issues when > > keep.forest=FALSE. But I think that's the bit I need for > > future predictions (right?). > > Yes, but what is your question? (Do you mean each *forest*, > instead of each *tree*?) I mean the component of the object that is created from randomForest that has the name "forest" (and takes up all the memory!).
> > A bit off the subject, but should the order at which at rows > > (ie. sets of explanatory variables) are passed to the > > randomForest function affect the result? I have noticed that > > if I pick a random unordered sample from my control data for > > training the error rate is much lower than if I a take an > > ordered sample. This remains true for all my cross-validation > > results. > > I'm not sure I understand. In randomForest() (as in other > functions) variables are in columns, rather than rows, so > are you talking about variables (columns) in different order > or data (rows) in different order? Yes, sorry I confused you. I mean the order at which data (rows) is passed, not columns. Finally, I see from http://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~breiman/RandomForests/cc_home.htm#inter that there is a component in Breiman's implementation of randomForest that computes interactions between parameters. Has this been implemented in R yet? Many thanks for your time and help. Eleni Rapsomaniki ______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
