[BUG] Fix missing input conversion in BaseDetector
#8328
Merged
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
- Fix inconsistent input handling in BaseDetector.fit() - Remove redundant Series conversion in SubLOF._fit - Update docstring to document supported input types
|
@benHeid I wanted to check in on my PR submitted a while ago. Are there any changes required to move it forward? |
BaseDetector
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.
Fixes #8325. This PR resolves an issue where the
SubLOFdetector fails when provided with numpy array inputs. The problem was caused by inconsistent input handling in the base class and redundant conversions inSubLOF.Key changes:
BaseDetector Fix:
BaseDetector.fit()to consistently use the converted input (X_inner) when calling_fit()SubLOF Improvements:
SubLOF._fit()since the base class now handles thisDoes your contribution introduce a new dependency? If yes, which one?
No new dependencies were added.
What should a reviewer concentrate their feedback on?
BaseDetector.fit()to always passX_innerto_fit()SubLOF._fit()Did you add any tests for the change?
No new tests were added, but existing tests were verified to pass.
Any other comments?
The fix ensures that
SubLOFworks consistently with different input types as expected.PR checklist