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

Implement SPORF in Proglearn: predict function, documentation #352

Open
parthgvora opened this issue Oct 30, 2020 · 4 comments · Fixed by #374
Open

Implement SPORF in Proglearn: predict function, documentation #352

parthgvora opened this issue Oct 30, 2020 · 4 comments · Fixed by #374
Assignees

Comments

@parthgvora
Copy link
Contributor

parthgvora commented Oct 30, 2020

The end goal is to create an sklearn compliant SPORF in proglearn that is modular enough to add different kinds of oblique trees in the future (i.e. MORF). This issue is in tandem with #351

  1. Implement the predict & predict_proba functions for the oblique tree
  2. Write unit tests for above functions.
  3. Write sklearn compliant documentation for new class
  4. Feature request for sklearn oblique trees: write "Describe your workflow section"
@parthgvora
Copy link
Contributor Author

Please assign @jmandavilli this issue

@parthgvora parthgvora changed the title Implement SPORF in sklearn: unit tests, documentation, tutorial Implement SPORF in Proglearn: predict function, documentation Nov 11, 2020
@jmandavilli
Copy link
Contributor

Could I be assigned to this issue

@PSSF23 PSSF23 linked a pull request Nov 20, 2020 that will close this issue
@levinwil
Copy link
Collaborator

Closing, per PR #374

@PSSF23 PSSF23 mentioned this issue Feb 2, 2021
@PSSF23
Copy link
Member

PSSF23 commented Feb 3, 2021

Reopen until performance and correctness verified with paper figures

@PSSF23 PSSF23 reopened this Feb 3, 2021
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 a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants