getInputDescription

steffen

Hello RapidMiner Team

I am currently using rm4.6. I am not sure whether this is a bug or not, but if so and you have already fixed it in 5.0 I will remain silent and go back to my cave .

I am talking about the function: getInputDescription(Class cls), especially in the case of BinominalClassificationPerformance aka AbstractPerformanceEvaluator . If I did understand this method it checks whether an ExampleSet (in the mentioned special case) is in the "input-area" and if this is true, it creates the parameter "keep_example_set".

So ... if I create a new process and add BinominalClassifcationPerformance, no parameter is shown. Accepted. However, adding more operators ...

<operator name="Root" class="Process" expanded="yes">
    <operator name="ExampleSource" class="ExampleSource">
        <parameter key="attributes"	value="/home/steffen/rm_workspace/sample/data/golf.aml"/>
    </operator>
    <operator name="NaiveBayes" class="NaiveBayes">
        <parameter key="keep_example_set"	value="true"/>
    </operator>
    <operator name="BinominalClassificationPerformance" class="BinominalClassificationPerformance">
        <parameter key="AUC"	value="true"/>
    </operator>
    <operator name="Dummy_to_show_error_message" class="BinDiscretization">
    </operator>
</operator>

does not change what I see. Is this a bug ?

Before I got problems with the usage of XVPrediction. In detail, the following situations occur, but I havent see a pattern yet (yes, I changed the process, no, as  far as I remember, I did not change the critical part):

• keep_example_set is shown
• keep_example_set is not shown and the process crashes because the exampleset is missing
• keep_example_set is not shown, the validation-check is d'accord and the process run smoothly

Adding IOMultiplier of cause solves the problem.

kind regards,

Steffen

PS: If I find a pattern, I will report it. But maybe this issue is already fixed in 5.0.

land

Hi Steffen,
you can't really say, it is fixed. I'd rather say: It has been removed completely. Thanks to the explicit dataflow and the ports, this method and it's strange behavior could be removed completely.
So I hope your cave is heated at least

Greetings from Dortmund,
  Sebastian

steffen

Hello Sebastian ...

and thanks for the reply. I admit I did not try out RM5.0 yet due to missing time, but I am running out of apologies.

I always prefer to use the community edition for self-building, but I am not able to build rm5.0-beta. I added another thread to keep the forum organization clean (here).

kind regards,

Steffen