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

FIX acc_find_split_time and acc_compute_hist_time of root nodes in HistGradientBoosting* #24894

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 18, 2022

Conversation

lorentzenchr
Copy link
Member

Reference Issues/PRs

HistGradientBoostingClassifier and HistGradientBoostingRegressor, with verbose>=1, print detailed timing information on computing histograms and finding best splits. The current implementation neglects the computations of acc_find_split_time as well as acc_compute_hist_time for the root nodes.

What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.

Add additional time spent in root nodes.

@lorentzenchr lorentzenchr added the Quick Review For PRs that are quick to review label Nov 11, 2022
Copy link
Member

@glemaitre glemaitre left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link
Member

@jjerphan jjerphan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM.

@jjerphan jjerphan merged commit c6a2612 into scikit-learn:main Nov 18, 2022
@lorentzenchr lorentzenchr deleted the hgbt_time_spend_xxx branch November 18, 2022 09:52
@lorentzenchr
Copy link
Member Author

Should we mention this in the changelog?

@glemaitre
Copy link
Member

Yes, an entry in the changelog should be good indeed. People will get an increase in time and could think that it comes from a bug in the code but this is not the case.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
module:ensemble Quick Review For PRs that are quick to review
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants