The Altair Community is migrating to a new platform to provide a better experience for you. In preparation for the migration, the Altair Community is on read-only mode from October 28 - November 6, 2024. Technical support via cases will continue to work as is. For any urgent requests from Students/Faculty members, please submit the form linked here
About the parameter "local_random_seed" in XValidation Operator
Hi,
RM is a fantastic tool for data mining research and application. Thanks for your good work. Here I have a problem when I use the 04_XValidation_Nominal.xml sample. Theoretically, when the "sampling_type" parameter is set to be "stratified sampling" and "local_random_seed" is set to be -1, the results should be a little different in different iteration of running, since each time the training sample and test sample are different in each fold validation. In my test, the result has no change. I tried several other example source, it still has no change. Could anybody tell me what's the problem. Thanks again.
RM is a fantastic tool for data mining research and application. Thanks for your good work. Here I have a problem when I use the 04_XValidation_Nominal.xml sample. Theoretically, when the "sampling_type" parameter is set to be "stratified sampling" and "local_random_seed" is set to be -1, the results should be a little different in different iteration of running, since each time the training sample and test sample are different in each fold validation. In my test, the result has no change. I tried several other example source, it still has no change. Could anybody tell me what's the problem. Thanks again.
0
Answers
setting the "local_random_seed" to -1 means: use the global random seed. The global random seed is initialized everytime you start the process. This is necessary because otherwise you were not able to recompute your results. However, running XValidation two times within the SAME process causes different results.
See this setup here (simply copy and paste in the xml-tab) hope this was helpful
Steffen
Thanks for your instant reply. Your solution did help.
only an additional side note: you could also change the global random seed of the root operator to -1 which means that in this case a different seed would be used for every new run.
Cheers,
Ingo
Thank you for a new optional solution to my problem and at the same time, this one remove all my muddle.
Best
liga