Closed operdeck closed 3 months ago
Updated with the points you mentioned.
Cool. I can't see it in the article because that only gets republished with a new version?
Op di 23 mei 2023 om 18:10 schreef yusufuyanik1 @.***>:
Updated https://pegasystems.github.io/pega-datascientist-tools/Python/articles/ADMExplained.html with the points you mentioned.
- the adjusted propensity in the table is wrong, is all the same for all bins: You can't see this point from the article but it is also fixed. You can check the source actual notebook with code: https://github.com/pegasystems/pega-datascientist-tools/blob/master/examples/articles/ADMExplained.ipynb
- Additional point: Urls are not hidden in the article, will be updated with the next PR
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/pegasystems/pega-datascientist-tools/issues/95#issuecomment-1559748913, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABEVTKGZLAENECNPSKLSD7DXHTONTANCNFSM6AAAAAAYKGW6WA . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: @.***>
The article should be fully in sync with whatever's there in the repo, it's not tied to any versions. Let's check tomorrow.
R version changed with better formulae and selected a different predictor, one with AUC < the model itself
@operdeck @yusufuyanik1 just a check - have we fixed this one?
@StijnKas Yes, we aligned them
pdstools version checks
[X] I have checked that this issue has not already been reported.
[X] I have confirmed this bug exists on the latest version of pdstools.
Issue description
looking at https://pegasystems.github.io/pega-datascientist-tools/Python/articles/ADMExplained.html and comparing to https://pegasystems.github.io/pega-datascientist-tools/R/articles/adm-explained.html
The order of the fields is different but the python version is preferable (sorted)
Reproducible example
Expected behavior
At par with R version
Installed versions