Adding some new kwargs to Catboost and LogisticRegression #1202
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1202 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 99.74% 99.74% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 196 196
Lines 12020 11998 -22
==========================================
- Hits 11989 11967 -22
Misses 31 31
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
freddyaboulton
force-pushed
the
tidy-up-kwargs-catboost-logistic
branch
from
b31da9f
to
b21601b
Compare
freddyaboulton
force-pushed
the
tidy-up-kwargs-catboost-logistic
branch
from
b21601b
to
d2a6ff0
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice, this looks clean! I should have chimed in before but allow_writing_files was previously set to default to False so that evalml wouldn't also dump all of the catboost training logs, but it's also great to provide this as an option to users 😁 Thanks, @freddyaboulton!
freddyaboulton
force-pushed
the
tidy-up-kwargs-catboost-logistic
branch
3 times, most recently
from
f8c3e2a
to
7b5b1e7
Compare
freddyaboulton
force-pushed
the
tidy-up-kwargs-catboost-logistic
branch
2 times, most recently
from
57544c8
to
c505632
Compare
|
@dsherry Is this good to merge despite codecov/project failure? I think it would be ok because the number of misses has not increased compared to main (still 9). I think the issue is that the coverage in this branch is 11982/11991 = 0.999249, and the coverage in main is 12004/12013 = 0.999250 which is technically a decrease 💀 . Maybe in the future we can change codecov to fail only if the number of missed lines increases? |
| @@ -33,16 +32,14 @@ class CatBoostClassifier(Estimator): | |||
| SEED_MAX = SEED_BOUNDS.max_bound | |||
|
|
|||
| def __init__(self, n_estimators=10, eta=0.03, max_depth=6, bootstrap_type=None, silent=True, | |||
| random_state=0, **kwargs): | |||
| allow_writing_files=False, random_state=0, **kwargs): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Awesome, thanks!
I think we should try to keep it so that if we do anything with the kwargs params other than passing them along to the component obj, we should declare them as named parameters. It'll keep our code clean.
|
@freddyaboulton yes let's do it. We probably need to change our codecov thresholds... You want me to merge it? |
|
@dsherry Yep, I can merge! Thank you |
… to logitistic regression init.
freddyaboulton
force-pushed
the
tidy-up-kwargs-catboost-logistic
branch
from
c505632
to
c91b5fd
Compare
Pull Request Description
In #1157, we agreed to add
multi_classandsolverkwargs to the logistic regression init (discussion) and addallow_writing_filesto the Catboost init (discussion)This doesn't change the default behavior of these estimators because we are using the same defaults as before.
After creating the pull request: in order to pass the release_notes_updated check you will need to update the "Future Release" section of
docs/source/release_notes.rstto include this pull request by adding :pr:123.