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

[R-package] Disabled early stopping when using 'dart' boosting strategy #2443

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Oct 25, 2019

Conversation

jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator

See discussion in #1893 for background. In this PR, I propose disabling early stopping when the user chooses 'dart' boosting. The same change was made in the Python package in #1895 .

This PR also adds the additional early stopping alias that was added in #2431 .

While working on this piece of code, I refactored it to make it a bit more obvious what is happening. I found that the same code is copied in lgb.cv() and lgb.train(). I think this duplication could lead to inconsistencies in the future, but I considered reducing that duplication out of scope.

@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

@jameslamb Please see this my comment.

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@jameslamb Please see this my comment.

@StrikerRUS apologies, I actually meant to address that comment in PR description. What do you think should be done? Since users are just passing in functions to callbacks, I don't know how to tell whether those functions are for early stopping or some other purpose.

Are you just suggesting that I invoke this warning WHENEVER someone uses dart boosting, so that people who passed early stopping custom callbacks will know?

@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

@jameslamb In my comment from the original issue I meant that this fix covers the case when user passes boosting = 'dart' and early_stopping_rounds = x. However, it seems that the fix doesn't cover the case when user passes boosting = 'dart' and callbacks = list(cb.early.stop(x)). Am I wrong? The Python-package fix covers the both cases. I think it's possible just to mimic the Python code fix or

Since users are just passing in functions to callbacks, I don't know how to tell whether those functions are for early stopping or some other purpose.

attr(callback, "name") <- "cb.early.stop"

maybe somehow use this information?

@Laurae2
Copy link
Contributor

Laurae2 commented Sep 29, 2019

@jameslamb @StrikerRUS From what I read, is it any(unlist(lapply(callbacks, function(x) {attr(x, "name")})) == "cb.early.stop") which should be also added as a condition?

@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

@jameslamb @Laurae2 Maybe simply move the check into the callback function as it was done for Python-package? https://github.com/microsoft/LightGBM/pull/1895/files

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@jameslamb @StrikerRUS From what I read, is it any(unlist(lapply(callbacks, function(x) {attr(x, "name")})) == "cb.early.stop") which should be also added as a condition?

to your @StrikerRUS 's comment...yes I could add that and am happy to, but cb.early.stop() is not exported from the package (https://github.com/microsoft/LightGBM/blob/master/R-package/NAMESPACE). So we can add that check (or something similar) to 100% prevent "any early stopping callbacks that are part of the LightGBM package", but I don't think there is anything we can do about the case where some user writes their own totally-custom thing and passing it to callbacks. I think that's fine, just want to clarify the difference.

As far as pushing the logic down into callback() like #1895 , I personally could not figure out how to do that in the R package. The structure of callback.R is quite a bit different from callback.py, as far as I can tell. Let me take another look at cb.early.stop() and see if I can mimic the behavior.

@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

@jameslamb

... but cb.early.stop() is not exported from the package

Ah, I didn't know that!
So, I added known issue 6 in #1143 (comment) by a mistake, right?

but I don't think there is anything we can do about the case where some user writes their own totally-custom thing and passing it to callbacks.

I don't think that someone would write a custom callback for early stopping, since we already have early stopping callback. Even if one will, they will use our implementation as a reference and will see the prohibition of using early stopping with the dart mode.

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jameslamb commented Sep 29, 2019

@jameslamb

... but cb.early.stop() is not exported from the package

Ah, I didn't know that!
So, I added known issue 6 in #1143 (comment) by a mistake, right?

but I don't think there is anything we can do about the case where some user writes their own totally-custom thing and passing it to callbacks.

I don't think that someone would write a custom callback for early stopping, since we already have early stopping callback. Even if one will, they will use our implementation as a reference and will see the prohibition of using early stopping with the dart mode.

I don't think that known issue was a mistake, maybe you just meant something different than what I thought. We do have a keyword argument callbacks in lgb.train() and lgb.cv(), so I assumed your comment was about more thoroughly documenting the expect form of functions passed to that argument. Right now the documentation just says "A list of callback functions to evaluate at each iteration"

So our approach right now is to say "you can enable early stopping by passing early_stopping_rounds and providing a validation set to valids", not "add function cb.early_stop() to callbacks argument". callbacks is a generic mechanism the R package uses for "any code you want to run after each iteration". By the way this is the closest I've looked at this section of the code in a while so @Laurae2 may correct me, but I think that is how it works.

I think for now it would be sufficient to add the check using attr() to see if cb.early.stop has added to the list in callbacks.

@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

@jameslamb Nope, I thought right about documenting functions in callback.R, because I was sure that users are encouraged take them and pass to callbacks argument.

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@jameslamb Nope, I thought right about documenting functions in callback.R, because I was sure that users are encouraged take them and pass to callbacks argument.

Ok then yes, I misinterpreted what you meant. Documenting would also mean exporting. This is one of those things where R and Python are really different...in R you have to explicitly declare things as exported to make them usable. I'll update the language in #1143 to say "export callback functions" if that's alright.

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Ok @Laurae2 @StrikerRUS whenever you have time, could you take another look? I've added protection against cb.early.stop() being passed directly via callbacks parameter.

I still left this in lgb.train() and lgb.cv() because I couldn't figure out how to do it all the way down in callback() like in the Python package.

@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

@jameslamb

I'll update the language in #1143 to say "export callback functions" if that's alright.

I think that then this is another issue, even more feature request. But anyway, it's not related to pkgdown issue. I'll remove it from that list. Can you please create a separate issue for exporting callback functions?

R-package/R/lgb.cv.R Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@jameslamb

I'll update the language in #1143 to say "export callback functions" if that's alright.

I think that then this is another issue, even more feature request. But anyway, it's not related to pkgdown issue. I'll remove it from that list. Can you please create a separate issue for exporting callback functions?

Ok makes sense. I've created #2479 and attached it to #2302

@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

@jameslamb I'm sorry, but could you please explain what is wrong with the following try to mimic Python solution on [pseudo?]R? https://www.diffchecker.com/LylbJ8EG

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jameslamb commented Oct 1, 2019

@jameslamb I'm sorry, but could you please explain what is wrong with the following try to mimic Python solution on [pseudo?]R? https://www.diffchecker.com/LylbJ8EG

I have never seen diffchecker.com before, super cool!

In my opinion, this code proposed in your link is going to be difficult to debug and reason about.

It's relying on a flag called enabled being present one level up the call stack environment up (since it is not passed into init() and params being available an unknown number of levels up the call stack environments up (since it is not passed in to init() or to cb.early.stop().

So in my opinion while my proposal in this PR feels more tedious, it is also more obvious and easier to debug / change.

I made that choice partially because I just feel it is a better design for the R package, but also partially because I am not so familiar with all of the R code package code that I could know the full implications of doing something like you proposed.

I will defer to @Laurae2 (who understand the internals of the R package more thoroughly) though. If @Laurae2 prefers something like the way this was handled in the Python package and pseudocode in your in link here, I'll happily change the approach from this PR and push the logic down into cb.early.stop().

edit: fixed incorrect use of "call stack" in my original comment

@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

@jameslamb Thanks a lot for your explanation!

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I just rebased this to current master. ping @Laurae2 for a review

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I just rebased this to latest master to catch up with changes over the last two weeks. It is ready for review.

@Laurae2
Copy link
Contributor

Laurae2 commented Oct 23, 2019

@jameslamb As you pointed out there's a lot of things in common in lgb.train and lgb.cv which are still separated, you did the right things at the moment to duplicate the code.

Ideally in the future we should be able to merge all the duplicate code in one, but it requires rewriting the R package.

Copy link
Collaborator

@StrikerRUS StrikerRUS left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Left some minor suggestions.

R-package/R/aliases.R Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
R-package/R/aliases.R Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
R-package/R/callback.R Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
R-package/R/callback.R Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I've rebased to master and implemented requested changes to handling of aliases.

R-package/R/lgb.cv.R Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Ok this has been rebased to master and I've fixed the n_trees vs. n_rounds thing

Copy link
Collaborator

@StrikerRUS StrikerRUS left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, except two actually unresolved comments about grammar from #2443 (review).

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LGTM, except two actually unresolved comments about grammar from #2443 (review).

ah! ok fixing

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thank you for the reviews everyone! I am going to merge this once CI is done.

@jameslamb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

was getting this on check-docs task on Travis:

429: too many requests
http://www.ozone3d.net/gpu_caps_viewer/

Restarting that task after waiting a few minutes seemed to solve it, but something to keep an eye on I guess.

@jameslamb jameslamb merged commit 85be04a into microsoft:master Oct 25, 2019
@StrikerRUS
Copy link
Collaborator

StrikerRUS commented Oct 25, 2019

@jameslamb

Restarting that task after waiting a few minutes seemed to solve it, but something to keep an eye on I guess.

Yeah, I see this error very often. And docs job is needed to be restarted quite often, that is why we keep it only at Travis where each collaborator has enough rights to re-run it (#1497 (comment)).

@jameslamb jameslamb deleted the dart_early_stopping branch January 27, 2020 00:15
@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 27, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants