[scikit-learn] Predictive probability from cross_validate

[Guillaume Lemaître]

As the note is saying, you should not use this approach to evaluate your
model.
You should use cross_val_score instead.

On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 04:30, charujing123 <charujing123 at 163.com> wrote:

> hi
>  this function is exactly what i wanted. However, the description of this
> function contained this: Passing these predictions into an evaluation
> metric may not be a valid way to measure generalization performance.
> Could i use this prediction to calculate the accuracy? I am not sure after
> seeing this sentence.
> Thanks.
>
> 2019-08-13
> ------------------------------
> charujing123
> ------------------------------
>
> *发件人：*Guillaume Lemaître <g.lemaitre58 at gmail.com>
> *发送时间：*2019-08-12 23:16
> *主题：*Re: [scikit-learn] Predictive probability from cross_validate
> *收件人：*"Scikit-learn mailing list"<scikit-learn at python.org>
> *抄送：*
>
> cross_validate should not be used to make predictions but to evaluate the
> performance, the parameter, etc of models.
> You probably want to check cross_val_predict to get the prediction.
> However, be aware of what it involves:
>
> https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/cross_validation.html#obtaining-predictions-by-cross-validation
>
> On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 at 16:57, Rujing Zha <charujing123 at 163.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi
>> How to acquire the probability in the cross_validate function?
>> Thanks
>> Rujing
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 发自我的网易邮箱手机智能版
>>
>>
>>
>> 在 2019-08-05 22:31:38，"Andreas Mueller" <t3kcit at gmail.com> 写道：
>>
>> As usual, I agree ;)
>> I think it would be good to call out particularly important bugfixes so
>> they get reviews.
>> We might also want to think about how we can organize the issue tracker
>> better.
>>
>> Having more full-time people on the project certainly means more activity
>> but ideally we can use some of that time to make the issue tracker more
>> organized.
>>
>>
>> On 8/5/19 9:21 AM, Joel Nothman wrote:
>>
>> Yay for technology! Awesome to see you all and have some matters
>> clarified.
>>
>> Adrin is right that the issue tracker is increasingly overwhelming
>> (because there are more awesome people hired to work on the project, more
>> frequent sprints, etc). This meeting is a useful summary.
>>
>> The meeting mostly focussed on big features. We should be careful to not
>> leave behind important bugs fixes and work originating outside the core
>> devs.
>>
>> Despite that: Some of Guillaume's activities got cut off. I think it
>> would be great to progress both on stacking and resampling before the next
>> release.
>>
>> I also think these meetings should, as a standing item, note the
>> estimated upcoming release schedule, to help us remain aware of that
>> cadence.
>>
>> Good night!
>>
>> J
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> scikit-learn mailing listscikit-learn at python.orghttps://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> scikit-learn mailing list
>> scikit-learn at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
>>
>
>
> --
> Guillaume Lemaitre
> INRIA Saclay - Parietal team
> Center for Data Science Paris-Saclay
> https://glemaitre.github.io/
>
> _______________________________________________
> scikit-learn mailing list
> scikit-learn at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
>


-- 
Guillaume Lemaitre
INRIA Saclay - Parietal team
Center for Data Science Paris-Saclay
https://glemaitre.github.io/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/scikit-learn/attachments/20190813/c1c00a73/attachment-0001.html>