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

xgbDART #742

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
Sep 28, 2017
Merged

xgbDART #742

merged 15 commits into from
Sep 28, 2017

Conversation

hadjipantelis
Copy link
Contributor

'xgboost' offers a third booster type option - DART. It allows controlling under/over-fitting by drop-outs; trees added to correct trivial errors may be prevented. Relevant reference by Rashmi & Gilad-Bachrach here. All test in RegressionTests/Code work fine. (The standard warning when passing xgb.DMatrix as inputs remain) Due to it's design (it has to traverse all the previous trees before making the "next fit") it is slower than xgbTree.

Comment: I have found it to be good in terms of varImp insights. Some artificial noise-variables that tricked xgbTree were weeded-out by xgbDART in some toy examples I tried.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Sep 27, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #742 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #742   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   16.97%   16.97%           
=======================================
  Files          90       90           
  Lines       13187    13187           
=======================================
  Hits         2238     2238           
  Misses      10949    10949

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update bcd2cd9...3acde64. Read the comment docs.


if( !is.null(modelFit$param$objective) && modelFit$param$objective == 'binary:logitraw'){
p <- predict(modelFit, newdata)
out <- exp(p)/(1+exp(p))
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Using out <- binomial()$linkinv(p) would be better since it takes into account potential numerical issues

"Minimum Loss Reduction",
"Subsample Percentage",
"Subsample Ratio of Columns",
"Fraction of previous trees to drop during dropout",
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you shorten these and use consistent capitalization (e.g. maybe "Fraction of Previous Trees")? The labels might get used in ggplot legends or facets and long labels might be an issue.

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
Package: caret
Version: 6.0-77
Version: 6.0-78
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I just revved the file to bump the version up so this isn't needed.

@topepo
Copy link
Owner

topepo commented Sep 27, 2017

It looks good. I had a few minor notes that you should see.

@hadjipantelis
Copy link
Contributor Author

No problem, all very reasonable; implemented.

@topepo topepo merged commit 87c1ac5 into topepo:master Sep 28, 2017
@topepo
Copy link
Owner

topepo commented Sep 28, 2017

Thanks!

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

3 participants