-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.9k
FIX Draw indices using sample_weight in Forest #31529
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
FIX Draw indices using sample_weight in Forest #31529
Conversation
sklearn/ensemble/_forest.py
Outdated
if sample_weight is None: | ||
sample_weight = np.ones(n_samples) | ||
normalized_sample_weight = sample_weight / np.sum(sample_weight) | ||
sample_indices = random_instance.choice( | ||
n_samples, n_samples_bootstrap, replace=True, p=normalized_sample_weight | ||
) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I hesitate between two options for dealing with the sample_weight=None
case.
- Convert to all ones.
if sample_weight is None:
sample_weight = np.ones(n_samples)
normalized_sample_weight = sample_weight / np.sum(sample_weight)
sample_indices = random_instance.choice(
n_samples, n_samples_bootstrap, replace=True, p=normalized_sample_weight
)
- Use the old code path when
sample_weight=None
if sample_weight is None:
sample_indices = random_instance.randint(
0, n_samples, n_samples_bootstrap, dtype=np.int32
)
else:
normalized_sample_weight = sample_weight / np.sum(sample_weight)
sample_indices = random_instance.choice(
n_samples,
n_samples_bootstrap,
replace=True,
p=normalized_sample_weight,
)
The benefit of 2. is that the code is backward compatible when sample_weight=None
, this PR and main give the exact same fit for a given random_state
.
The benefit of 1. is that sample_weight=None
and sample_weight=np.ones(n_samples)
give the exact same fit for a given random_state
.
Using 1. test_set_estimator_drop
, test_rfe_features_importance
or test_forest_classifier_oob
fail. These tests do not use sample_weight
.
Using 2. test_class_weights
fails, because it checks that no or all ones sample_weight
give the same results.
# NOTE: "balanced_subsample" option is ignored, treated as "balanced" | ||
class_weight = self.class_weight | ||
if class_weight == "balanced_subsample": | ||
class_weight = "balanced" | ||
expanded_class_weight = compute_sample_weight(class_weight, y_original) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Here I choose to simply ignore the "balanced_subsample" option and treat it as the "balanced" case.
Part of #16298. Similar to #31414 (Bagging estimators) but for Forest estimators.
What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.
When subsampling is activated (
bootstrap=True
),sample_weight
are now used as probabilities to draw the indices. Forest estimators then pass the statistical repeated/weighted equivalence test.Comments
This PR does not fix Forest estimators when
bootstrap=False
(no subsampling).sample_weight
are still passed to the decision trees. Forest estimators then fail the statistical repeated/weighted equivalence test because the individual treesalso fail this test (probably because of tied splits in decision trees #23728).
TODO
sample_weight=None
casemax_samples
as done in FIX Draw indices using sample_weight in Bagging #31414balanced_subsample
option