Andreas wrote: > Sorry for being terse, I should be working.
Yes, me too. I think this is the last commit you'll see from me for a while. > We really can not break backward compatibility. > One possibility is to have the old ``grid_scores_`` be the same as Backwards-compatible ``grid_scores_`` is available again, and tested. > it was before and make ``cv_scores_`` have the new structure. Currently my solution stores precisely three attributes: * grid_results_ -- data on a per-grid-point basis (1d struct array) * fold_results_ -- data on a per-fold basis (2d struct array) * best_index_ -- the offset into those arrays for the highest-scoring data point (also, best_estimator_ is stored if refit=True) grid_scores_, best_params_ and best_score_ are now calculated as properties since they are derivative from the above. grid_ and fold_ may not be eminently clear, but "scores" is a misnomer (because these include parameters and times). Composite score output (at train and test time) is also now tested (19ea7eac0d). I assume backwards-compatibility for fit_grid_point is not necessary. However, it currently returns clf_params for no need. Finally, if you don't like the Scorer.store() approach, it could be replaced with Scorer.named_scores() which would return an iterable of (name, value) pairs, one of those names necessarily being 'score'. Then the prefixing happens on the grid_search side. In fact, I think this is a bit neater... https://github.com/jnothman/scikit-learn/tree/grid_search_more_info ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Scikit-learn-general mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scikit-learn-general
