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

[ML] Prefer smaller models with similar performance #1516

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Oct 13, 2020

Conversation

valeriy42
Copy link
Contributor

@valeriy42 valeriy42 commented Sep 30, 2020

For regression and classification, during hyperparameter optimization we prefer smaller models if the loss functions are otherwise comparable.

To this end, we add 0.01 * "forest number nodes" * E[GP] / "average forest number nodes" as an additional penalty.

@valeriy42 valeriy42 changed the title [WIP][ML] Prefer smaller models with similar performance [ML] Prefer smaller models with similar performance Oct 13, 2020
@valeriy42 valeriy42 added v7.11.0 and removed WIP labels Oct 13, 2020
@valeriy42
Copy link
Contributor Author

@wwang500 just a heads-up: in some cases this may lead to a regression of the results by <1% (in terms of MSE, MSLE, Huber) or less (for classification).

Copy link
Contributor

@tveasey tveasey left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@valeriy42 valeriy42 merged commit bd14f42 into elastic:master Oct 13, 2020
@valeriy42 valeriy42 deleted the nudge-model-size branch October 13, 2020 14:16
valeriy42 added a commit to valeriy42/ml-cpp that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2020
For regression and classification, during hyperparameter optimization we prefer smaller models if the loss functions are otherwise comparable.

To this end, we add 0.01 * "forest number nodes" * E[GP] / "average forest number nodes" as an additional penalty.
valeriy42 added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 14, 2020
For regression and classification, during hyperparameter optimization we prefer smaller models if the loss functions are otherwise comparable.

To this end, we add 0.01 * "forest number nodes" * E[GP] / "average forest number nodes" as an additional penalty.

Backport of #1516.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants