I misspoke. I didn't mean that there is a reason not to support it, just that there are no current plans to support it and that we would welcome a willing contributor to get it rolling.
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 2:36 PM Andreas Mueller <t3k...@gmail.com> wrote: > Why not? > I thought we wanted to add estimator-based imputation. > The problem with fancyimpute is that it has no notion of test set, so you > can't apply it to new data. > > Cheers, > Andy > > > > On 06/15/2017 08:31 PM, Jacob Schreiber wrote: > > Most likely not. If there is a willing contributor, we would be happy to > review a PR though. > > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Akash Devgun <akash.dev...@colorado.edu> > wrote: > >> Will you have in future?? >> >> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 5:14 PM Jacob Schreiber <jmschreibe...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> No. >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Akash Devgun <akash.dev...@colorado.edu >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> Please let me know .... Do you have random Forest Imputation model in >>>> python-scikit learn similar to rfImpute in R has ? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> scikit-learn mailing list >>>> scikit-learn@python.org >>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn >>>> >>>> >>> > > > _______________________________________________ > scikit-learn mailing > listscikit-learn@python.orghttps://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn > > > _______________________________________________ > scikit-learn mailing list > scikit-learn@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn >
_______________________________________________ scikit-learn mailing list scikit-learn@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
