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

hamming_loss should not have a labels parameter #10580

Closed
jnothman opened this issue Feb 3, 2018 · 5 comments · Fixed by #12656
Closed

hamming_loss should not have a labels parameter #10580

jnothman opened this issue Feb 3, 2018 · 5 comments · Fixed by #12656
Labels
Easy Well-defined and straightforward way to resolve help wanted

Comments

@jnothman
Copy link
Member

jnothman commented Feb 3, 2018

hamming_loss only uses labels in the case where the input is multilabel. Then, it only uses the number of labels, which is identical to y_true.shape[1]. So it's completely unnecessary.

I think we should either:

  • deprecate and remove it. (My preference)
  • allow it to specify a subset of labels to evaluate over, and note that it is only used in the multilabel case
@jnothman jnothman added Easy Well-defined and straightforward way to resolve help wanted labels Feb 3, 2018
@qmick
Copy link
Contributor

qmick commented Feb 3, 2018

Can I take this?

@jnothman
Copy link
Member Author

jnothman commented Feb 3, 2018

I think so

@qmick
Copy link
Contributor

qmick commented Feb 4, 2018

Shall we remove classes parameter at the same time? Since it is deprecated since 0.18 and will be removed in 0.20.

@jnothman
Copy link
Member Author

jnothman commented Feb 4, 2018 via email

@Akanksha1Raj
Copy link

I am working on this

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Easy Well-defined and straightforward way to resolve help wanted
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants