Shouldn't these be improvements to scipy, rather than live in
scikit-learn?
Gaƫl
On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 09:47:59AM +0200, Matthias Feurer wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> Having distributions objects would be useful for several reasons:
> 1. Having a uniform way to programatically access the parameters of
Hi Andy,
Having distributions objects would be useful for several reasons:
1. Having a uniform way to programatically access the parameters of all
kinds of distribution objects. Currently, I could parse the 'args' item
in 'distribution.__dict__'. I don't know how important this is for
Respected sir,
on which project should i work on to increase my
chances for gsoc 2017 .please,i need some guidance.
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Andreas Mueller wrote:
> Hi Matthias.
> Can you explain this point again?
> Is it about the bad __repr__ ?
Hi Matthias.
Can you explain this point again?
Is it about the bad __repr__ ?
Thanks,
Andy
On 05/07/2016 08:56 AM, Matthias Feurer wrote:
Dear Joel,
Thank you for taking the time to answer my email. I didn't see the PR
on this topic, thanks for pointing me to that. I can see your points
Dear Joel,
Thank you for taking the time to answer my email. I didn't see the PR on
this topic, thanks for pointing me to that. I can see your points with
regards to the get_params() method and it might be better if I write
more serialization code on my side (although for example
On 7 May 2016 at 19:12, Matthias Feurer
wrote:
> 1. Return the fit and predict time in `grid_scores_`
>
This has been proposed for many years as part of an overhaul of
grid_scores_. The latest attempt is currently underway at
Dear scikit-learn team,
First of all, the model selection module is really easy to use and has a
nice and clean interface, I really like that. Nevertheless, while using
it for benchmarks I found some shortcomings where I think the module
could be improved.
1. Return the fit and predict time