yes On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org>wrote:
> Sorry for my poor wording. > > Just to confirm: > for CNB, smaller is better? > for NB, larger is better? > > On Sep 15, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Robin Anil wrote: > > > Smaller is better(negative number so largest of the negative number in > > absolute value), this is to say if you have the lowest affinity to the > > complement class, you have highest affinity to the actual class which the > > data belongs to. > > > > Unless the new computation is spitting out positive numbers > > in which case its the largest. > > :-) > > > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:18 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org > >wrote: > > > >> What's the interpretation of scores for the output from the new > >> (complementary) naive bayes classifiers? Larger is better, right? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Grant > >> > >> > >> > > >
