hi guys,

the scale_C is not released yet and not setting it in the current release raises
a warning. But maybe we could be even more explicit to warn users.

right now C is None by default and defaults to n_samples which amounts
to the C=1 with scale_C=False which is the default behavior of libsvm.

without the scale_C the libsvm/liblinear bindings are the only models
whose hyperparameters
depend on the training set size.

@james : what do you think could make things better?

Alex

On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 2:04 AM, Andreas Mueller
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On 03/17/2012 01:55 AM, Lars Buitinck wrote:
>> Op 17 maart 2012 01:30 heeft Andreas<[email protected]>  het
>> volgende geschreven:
>>> If we change the API, I would go for alpha as the current
>>> "scale_C=True" but optionally provide the "C", which behaves
>>> like the LibSVM parameter.
>> You mean we'd have two regularization parameters? I'd find that confusing.
>>
> What would you prefer?
>
> Not having a "C" parameter is also somewhat confusing. And having a
> "C" parameter that does something different than the "C" parameter
> of the software we are wrapping is also pretty confusing.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF email is sponsosred by:
> Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
> _______________________________________________
> Scikit-learn-general mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scikit-learn-general

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF email is sponsosred by:
Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
_______________________________________________
Scikit-learn-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scikit-learn-general

Reply via email to