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

Introducing better customisation #148

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 31, 2023
Merged

Introducing better customisation #148

merged 3 commits into from
May 31, 2023

Conversation

ppdebreuck
Copy link
Owner

This PR combines various changes to enable better user customisation of the MODNet pipeline. The workflow is high-level by design. Nevertheless, it might be useful to add custom parameters without breaking the current code.

This includes:

  • Running feature selection only on a subset of properties present in the MODData. feature_ selection() now enables this with ignore_names.
  • By default, FitGenetic will proceed by using joint-learning when multiple targets are given in the MODData. This can now be avoided by using ignore_names in FitGenetic().
  • MODNetModel.fit() can take optional fit_params that are passed through to Keras model.fit().
  • fit_params can also be passed to FitGenetic.run()
  • MODNetModel.fit() can take a custom loss function.
  • FitGenetic() can take a custom loss function.
  • Custom data can be passed trough MODNetModel.fit(). It will be appended to the targets (axis=-1). This can be useful for defining custom loss functions.
  • Any property called custom_data in FitGenetic is ignored, and appended to the targets (axis=-1). This can be useful for defining custom loss functions.

@ppdebreuck ppdebreuck requested a review from ml-evs May 9, 2023 15:48
Copy link
Collaborator

@ml-evs ml-evs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@ml-evs ml-evs mentioned this pull request May 16, 2023
@ml-evs ml-evs merged commit 548ffbf into master May 31, 2023
This was referenced Jun 1, 2023
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