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

Add Shapley-based importance #87

Closed
bgreenwell opened this issue Dec 30, 2019 · 3 comments
Closed

Add Shapley-based importance #87

bgreenwell opened this issue Dec 30, 2019 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@bgreenwell
Copy link
Member

@bgreenwell bgreenwell commented Dec 30, 2019

Use fastshap for Shapley-based feature importance. Future versions of fastshap will utilize TreeSHAP for fast results when applied to certain models like xgboost and lightgbm.

@bradleyboehmke
Copy link
Member

@bradleyboehmke bradleyboehmke commented Dec 30, 2019

Should we have a vi_shap method that allows both fast shap and also tree shap methods? Meaning, it can leverage both fastshap and also allow xgboost's (and any other models) that have built-in shapley computations (shortcut to this).

@bgreenwell
Copy link
Member Author

@bgreenwell bgreenwell commented Dec 31, 2019

My thought is that fastshap will just default to using TreeSHAP in the next release so we’d just use that (consistent) interface! But yes, I like the idea of vi_shap() as the workhorse underneath. Ideally it would just call fastshap::explain(tree_mod, exact = TRUE, ...) or something to that effect.

@bgreenwell
Copy link
Member Author

@bgreenwell bgreenwell commented Jan 1, 2020

TODO:

  • - Add initial support.
  • - Update vignettes for website.
  • - Update R Journal article.
@bgreenwell bgreenwell closed this Jan 1, 2020
@bgreenwell bgreenwell reopened this Jan 1, 2020
@bgreenwell bgreenwell closed this Jan 19, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
2 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.