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

Use groups instead of mapping in the benchmark. #424

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 9, 2019
Merged

Conversation

gusmith
Copy link
Contributor

@gusmith gusmith commented Sep 9, 2019

First of two PRs related to multi party linkage.
First one: using groups instead of mappings, and introducing a new metric for the grouping output.
In this PR, it is still hard coded to be ran for two parties only.

@gusmith gusmith requested a review from wilko77 September 9, 2019 01:13
@gusmith gusmith self-assigned this Sep 9, 2019
@gusmith gusmith mentioned this pull request Sep 9, 2019


def compose_result(status, tt, experiment, sizes, threshold):
tp, tn, fp, fn = tt
positives, negatives, false_positives = tt
sizes_dic = {'size_{}'.format(chr(97 + i)): sizes[i] for i in range(len(sizes))}
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what's that for? It isn't used anywhere. I guess you eventually will build the 'sizes' section in the result with that. Am I right?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You're right. I was trying to split the multi-party linkage benchmark update in two PRs, but this is a remaining of a wrong split. It becomes useful in the following PR.

@gusmith
Copy link
Contributor Author

gusmith commented Sep 9, 2019

Sorry Wilko, doing some force-push to rebase on top of latest develop.

@gusmith gusmith merged commit f2fe725 into develop Sep 9, 2019
@gusmith gusmith deleted the benchmark-groups branch September 9, 2019 04:47
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.

2 participants