In most RF implementations, "ordinal" as feature type isn't supported, yet in
many cases such data type is the most natural one. The good news is, ordinal
feature type can be accounted for with very little modifications:
1. If ordinal feature splits, it is treated as numerical feature
- IF encoded in a certain way
2. If ordinal feature is splitted, it is treated as categorical feature
- no need to pay attention to internal formatting
Thus, an ordinal feature has the dual property of being both numerical and
categorical at the same time. The proposed annotation for ordinal feature is
naturally "O", e.g.
O:ordinal_feature
as per AFM notation. One problem arises: should the ARFF standard be extended
to account for ordinal features?
Original issue reported on code.google.com by timo.erk...@gmail.com on 27 Aug 2012 at 2:10
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
timo.erk...@gmail.com
on 27 Aug 2012 at 2:10