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 a readme with logo and example #3

Merged
merged 20 commits into from
Feb 28, 2018
Merged

Add a readme with logo and example #3

merged 20 commits into from
Feb 28, 2018

Conversation

floriangardin
Copy link
Contributor

I added two examples and a short description about the tradeoff between interpretability and performances

@datajms
Copy link
Contributor

datajms commented Feb 28, 2018

LGTM +1

@ngoix ngoix merged commit 645b189 into scikit-learn-contrib:master Feb 28, 2018
X_train, y_train = X[:len(y)//2], y[:len(y)//2]
X_test, y_test = X[len(y)//2:], y[len(y)//2:]
clf.fit(X_train, y_train)
y_score = clf.score_top_rules(X_test) # Get a risk score for each test example
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why not using the standard method score_samples from sklearn API? this score_top_rules name makes the API very specific to the estimator which defeats the API consistency of sklearn.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we have 3 different scoring methods: decision_function, rules_vote, score_top_rules.
Maybe we should add a class parameter to chose one of these 3 functions at initialization ?

@agramfort
Copy link
Member

agramfort commented Mar 4, 2018 via email

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.

None yet

4 participants