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

Inclusion in scikit-mine #33

Open
remiadon opened this issue Sep 8, 2020 · 5 comments
Open

Inclusion in scikit-mine #33

remiadon opened this issue Sep 8, 2020 · 5 comments

Comments

@remiadon
Copy link

remiadon commented Sep 8, 2020

Hi there, very nice and rich implementation of these 3 algorithms

The INRIA center at Rennes is creating a new python library, namely scikit-mine, to centralise pattern mining methods, and improve inter-operability and consistency with other fields, such as Machine Learning.

Your API already has similarities with what scikit-mine provides, being:

In the context of scikit-mine, only BIDE and FEAT would be nice to have, as PrefixSpan mines too many patterns, and we encourage concise representations.

I also plan to try FEAT as a candidate generator for SQS-candidates, an algorithm based on MDL.
To this purpose handling gaps would be required, as SQS natively accounts them when running its optimization process

Anyone to provide support for integration into scikit-mine ?

@chuanconggao
Copy link
Owner

Hi, it is an interesting idea.

As the maintainer, I may provide some help but it requires some effort estimation. If there any planning or scope so far?

@remiadon
Copy link
Author

@chuanconggao thanks for responding,

I think we can start with something "simple"

  1. integrating BIDE, w.r.t functional definition in skmine
  2. unit tests for BIDE
  3. adding relevant example / doc for it

Rough estimation for this would be 2 weeks (my side) with daily feedback from you

Once this is done, I would add another task

  • make sure the skmine.callback API is consistent with your callback API (we can treat similar use cases with both)

@chuanconggao
Copy link
Owner

chuanconggao commented Mar 15, 2021

Sounds good.

On my side, I can start some refactoring to make it more robust.

@remiadon
Copy link
Author

remiadon commented Apr 8, 2021

@chuanconggao I wrapped your code and added a few unit tests in the PR mentioned above

What sort of refactoring were you thinking of ?

My implem is still missing the top-k part though ... which is interesting to have

@chuanconggao
Copy link
Owner

The refactoring part is mostly docstring, typing, and bug fixes.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants