On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:46 PM, Sreejith S <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Lance Norskog <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The Bayes in the examples doesn't work very well in the 20 newsgroups > > example. Something is wrong in the data ETL, the tuning options, or > > the Bayes implementation. > > > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > 97% is not correct. This sounds like you ran it on the training data. > > > > @Ted , yes i ran it on the same training data. > That isn't a valid test. > > > > > > > 63% also sounds low. I don't know what happened there. > > > > Is any one tested same 20newsgrop with SGD and got better results ? > I remember getting mid 80's. I think that some accuracy testing is in order, however, since I have seen hints that the auto-tuning is clamping down too soon. Also, vowpal wabbit has had excellent results using one round of SGD and additional rounds of L-BFGS. That might make a very powerful version of SGD that doesn't need as much of the tuning as we currently have.
