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

Adding benchmark notebook for hdbscan soft clustering #5103

Conversation

cjnolet
Copy link
Member

@cjnolet cjnolet commented Dec 22, 2022

No description provided.

@cjnolet cjnolet added doc Documentation non-breaking Non-breaking change labels Dec 22, 2022
@review-notebook-app
Copy link

Check out this pull request on  ReviewNB

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.


Powered by ReviewNB

Copy link
Contributor

@lowener lowener left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, can we also add a visualization of those benchmark results with a graphic?

notebooks/hdbscan_soft_clustering_benchmark.ipynb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@cjnolet
Copy link
Member Author

cjnolet commented Jan 11, 2023

Also tagging @beckernick here for awareness. This notebook is essentially a modified version of your benchmarking script from the HDBSCAN soft clustering blog. It's super useful, though.

@exactlyallan
Copy link
Member

@cjnolet from a content perspective, this notebook will work great for the website benchmark. Once its merged I will find a system to run this and rapidsai/cugraph#3135 and the cuDF benchmark @quasiben comes up with.

Co-authored-by: Micka <9810050+lowener@users.noreply.github.com>
@cjnolet
Copy link
Member Author

cjnolet commented Jan 19, 2023

LGTM, can we also add a visualization of those benchmark results with a graphic?

@lowener I think that's a great idea, maybe as a follow-on to improve the presentation. To start us out, this notebook was requested for providing a quick benchmark that can be used on the website.

@cjnolet cjnolet self-assigned this Jan 30, 2023
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Base: 69.26% // Head: 69.04% // Decreases project coverage by -0.23% ⚠️

Coverage data is based on head (5f621e7) compared to base (de32125).
Patch coverage: 91.11% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files
@@               Coverage Diff                @@
##           branch-23.02    #5103      +/-   ##
================================================
- Coverage         69.26%   69.04%   -0.23%     
================================================
  Files               192      192              
  Lines             12333    12370      +37     
================================================
- Hits               8543     8541       -2     
- Misses             3790     3829      +39     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
python/cuml/testing/strategies.py 92.85% <90.47%> (-1.22%) ⬇️
...ing/text/stem/porter_stemmer_utils/suffix_utils.py 91.11% <100.00%> (+0.20%) ⬆️
python/cuml/metrics/pairwise_kernels.py 73.22% <0.00%> (-7.88%) ⬇️
python/cuml/feature_extraction/_vectorizers.py 84.38% <0.00%> (-5.65%) ⬇️
...party/sklearn/preprocessing/_column_transformer.py 72.99% <0.00%> (-1.95%) ⬇️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@dantegd
Copy link
Member

dantegd commented Jan 31, 2023

/merge

@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot merged commit fb4bab4 into rapidsai:branch-23.02 Jan 31, 2023
@cjnolet
Copy link
Member Author

cjnolet commented Jan 31, 2023

@exactlyallan I moved the notebook to notebooks/tools to avoid the notebook tests running it in CI.

jakirkham pushed a commit to jakirkham/cuml that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Cython / Python Cython or Python issue doc Documentation non-breaking Non-breaking change
Projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants