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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

WIP: use get_feature_names_out from new sklearn if possible #77

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

WIP: use get_feature_names_out from new sklearn if possible #77

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

agramfort
Copy link
Member

follow up on https://mne.discourse.group/t/future-warning-in-feature-extraction/4631/1

just to start the ball rolling here...

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 27, 2022 •
edited

Codecov Report

Merging #77 (7abf7b4) into master (399092a) will decrease coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is 80.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #77      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   93.53%   93.48%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files          10       10              
  Lines        1455     1459       +4     
==========================================
+ Hits         1361     1364       +3     
- Misses         94       95       +1
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
mne_features/feature_extraction.py 94.73% <80.00%> (-0.54%) ⬇️

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 399092a...7abf7b4. Read the comment docs.

etiennedemontalivet
etiennedemontalivet reviewed Jan 26, 2023
View reviewed changes
mne_features/feature_extraction.py
@@ -219,7 +223,10 @@ def _apply_extractor(extractor, X, ch_names, return_as_df):
X = extractor.fit_transform(X)
feature_names = None
if return_as_df:
feature_names = extractor.get_feature_names()
if hasattr(extractor, 'get_feature_names_out'):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe changing the 4 lines with just:
feature_names = extractor.get_feature_names_out()
will increase code coverage ? (if this is the issue why not merging the PR)

@etiennedemontalivet
Copy link
Contributor

etiennedemontalivet commented Jan 26, 2023 •
edited

Is there any plan to merge this pull request ?
Since sklearn 1.2.1, they removed get_feature_names from FeatureUnion, so now it raises an error when using extract_features with return_as_df=True. Please tell me if I can help

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@etiennedemontalivet etiennedemontalivet etiennedemontalivet left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
2 participants
@agramfort @etiennedemontalivet