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

Limiting tree depth #80

Open
adamhaber-atidot opened this issue Jun 13, 2018 · 4 comments
Open

Limiting tree depth #80

adamhaber-atidot opened this issue Jun 13, 2018 · 4 comments
Milestone

Comments

@adamhaber-atidot
Copy link

I'm trying to use gplearn to automate feature engineering.

I have two questions:

  1. Is it possible to limit the depth of the programs (not only the initial depth)? I'm looking for "interpretable" features, which would correspond to shallower trees...
  2. Is it possible to pass a list of feature names such that the output of the best programs would be more informative?
@trevorstephens
Copy link
Owner

trevorstephens commented Jun 13, 2018

Interesting idea for # 1. Shall think on it.

On # 2... Can you give more details on the use-case? You don't want to use some features? Why include them in X then?

@trevorstephens
Copy link
Owner

Or you just want to see the output more readable? Sounds like #73 perhaps?

@adamhaber-atidot
Copy link
Author

Yes, definitely related!

What I had in mind is printing add(feature_name_1,feature_name_17) instead of add(X1,X17); for example, by passing an optional features_names list to the print method.

@eggachecat
Copy link
Contributor

eggachecat commented Mar 26, 2019

@trevorstephens

A reference may be helpful ...

https://github.com/DEAP/deap/blob/f6accf730555c5bbc1c50ac310250ad707353080/deap/gp.py#L891-L914

It seems like that they just replace the one violates the max depth constraint with a new random one

@trevorstephens trevorstephens modified the milestones: 0.4.1, 0.5.0 May 31, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants