FIX Treat gradient boosting categoricals outside the bounds as unknown during predict #24283
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Micky774
reviewed
Sep 6, 2022
Contributor
Micky774
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Minor suggestion for wording, otherwise looks good.
Regarding the test, would it be worthwhile to test against multiple unique negative values? I'm fine with it as it is now, but it wouldn't hurt.
Co-authored-by: Meekail Zain <[email protected]>
Micky774
reviewed
Sep 6, 2022
sklearn/ensemble/_hist_gradient_boosting/tests/test_gradient_boosting.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
betatim
approved these changes
Sep 20, 2022
Member
|
Looks good to me. Especially if you implement the open suggestion from Meekail ;) |
lorentzenchr
approved these changes
Sep 25, 2022
Member
lorentzenchr
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. Could you extend the docstrings of the estimator classes to document this behaviour?
sklearn/ensemble/_hist_gradient_boosting/tests/test_gradient_boosting.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
sklearn/ensemble/_hist_gradient_boosting/tests/test_gradient_boosting.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
sklearn/ensemble/_hist_gradient_boosting/tests/test_gradient_boosting.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
sklearn/ensemble/_hist_gradient_boosting/tests/test_gradient_boosting.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
sklearn/ensemble/_hist_gradient_boosting/tests/test_gradient_boosting.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Christian Lorentzen <[email protected]>
Member
|
@Micky774 Do you want to give it a second look and an approval? In that case I'll merge. |
Co-authored-by: Meekail Zain <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Meekail Zain <[email protected]>
thomasjpfan
added a commit
to thomasjpfan/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 9, 2022
glemaitre
pushed a commit
to glemaitre/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 31, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Reference Issues/PRs
Fixes #24274
What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.
This PR checks considers negative categorical input as unknown during predict.
Any other comments?
The alternative is to error, but I think the check is simple enough to support.