-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 165
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
Issue 118 catboost #119
Issue 118 catboost #119
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #119 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 94.81% 94.82% +<.01%
==========================================
Files 25 25
Lines 1582 1584 +2
Branches 220 220
==========================================
+ Hits 1500 1502 +2
Misses 49 49
Partials 33 33
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice work!
I believe we need to test this new parameter, though. Probably, we could update this test to use the added parameter fit_params
. Or even create another test.
I'm reviewing this test because it's breaking when I insert the |
Closing this one as we don't have updates |
Status
READY
Todo list
Background context
fit
method. One possible solution is to add afit_params
into the CatBoost function in FkLearn for increased flexibility.This is important especially for CatBoost because the parameter that allows it to treat categorical features by itself is inside the
fit
method, and this is the main differential in this library.Description of the changes proposed in the pull request
Allow the user to set fit params in CatBoost: https://catboost.ai/docs/concepts/python-reference_catboostregressor_fit.html#python-reference_catboostregressor_fit
Where should the reviewer start?
src/fklearn/training/classification.py
src/fklearn/training/regression.py