Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Adding some new kwargs to Catboost and LogisticRegression #1202

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Sep 24, 2020

Conversation

freddyaboulton
Copy link
Contributor

@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton commented Sep 18, 2020

Pull Request Description

In #1157, we agreed to add multi_class and solver kwargs to the logistic regression init (discussion) and add allow_writing_files to 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.rst to include this pull request by adding :pr:123.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 18, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #1202 into main will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            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              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...ents/estimators/classifiers/catboost_classifier.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
...onents/estimators/regressors/catboost_regressor.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
.../tests/component_tests/test_catboost_classifier.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
...l/tests/component_tests/test_catboost_regressor.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
evalml/tests/pipeline_tests/test_pipelines.py 99.22% <ø> (ø)
...ents/estimators/classifiers/logistic_regression.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
evalml/tests/component_tests/test_components.py 99.30% <100.00%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 8a71685...c91b5fd. Read the comment docs.

@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton force-pushed the tidy-up-kwargs-catboost-logistic branch from b31da9f to b21601b Compare Sep 18, 2020
@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton requested a review from dsherry Sep 18, 2020
@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton marked this pull request as ready for review Sep 18, 2020
@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton force-pushed the tidy-up-kwargs-catboost-logistic branch from b21601b to d2a6ff0 Compare Sep 18, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@jeremyliweishih jeremyliweishih left a comment

Looks good - really like these changes!

Copy link
Contributor

@angela97lin angela97lin left a 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 freddyaboulton force-pushed the tidy-up-kwargs-catboost-logistic branch 3 times, most recently from f8c3e2a to 7b5b1e7 Compare Sep 22, 2020
@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton self-assigned this Sep 23, 2020
@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton force-pushed the tidy-up-kwargs-catboost-logistic branch 2 times, most recently from 57544c8 to c505632 Compare Sep 23, 2020
@freddyaboulton
Copy link
Contributor Author

freddyaboulton commented Sep 24, 2020

@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?

Copy link
Collaborator

@dsherry dsherry left a comment

@freddyaboulton looks good to me!

@@ -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):
Copy link
Collaborator

@dsherry dsherry Sep 24, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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.

@dsherry
Copy link
Collaborator

dsherry commented Sep 24, 2020

@freddyaboulton yes let's do it. We probably need to change our codecov thresholds...

You want me to merge it?

@freddyaboulton
Copy link
Contributor Author

freddyaboulton commented Sep 24, 2020

@dsherry Yep, I can merge! Thank you

@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton force-pushed the tidy-up-kwargs-catboost-logistic branch from c505632 to c91b5fd Compare Sep 24, 2020
@dsherry dsherry merged commit 6b0f75d into main Sep 24, 2020
@freddyaboulton freddyaboulton deleted the tidy-up-kwargs-catboost-logistic branch Sep 24, 2020
@angela97lin angela97lin mentioned this pull request Sep 29, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants