Train function

[ellispatrick]

If would be good to have a train() function to complement predict() for situations where people don't need to run crossValidate.

Effectively this would take most of the same input as crossValidate() and then do a runTest.

One key distinction from crossValidate would be that for multiViewMethod is only fits one model. So by default this should be the full model unless they specify a assayCombination.

[DarioS]

A function named train doesn't suggest that prediction happens but it would. What about independentTrainTest?

[ellispatrick]

We have a function called predict. We should also have one called train. I wouldn’t bother with train/test in the same function. From: Dario Strbenac ***@***.***> Sent: Friday, 26 August 2022 11:00 AM To: DarioS/ClassifyR ***@***.***> Cc: Ellis Patrick ***@***.***>; Author ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [DarioS/ClassifyR] Train function (Issue #33) A function named train doesn't suggest that prediction happens but it would. What about independentTrainTest? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#33 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACAALBMKAQSKHEHZC3IXHKTV3AJKHANCNFSM56DDBU7A>. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.******@***.***>>

[DarioS]

Closed by ba722d2