-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26k
DOC update wording for MAPE formula #29775
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
Conversation
Maybe we could explain that the motivation is to be consistent with the convention of |
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.
Thanks @reshamas. LGTM, irrespective of whether we take my above comment into account.
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.
LGTM. Thanks @reshamas
🤔 MAPE is not in the range [0, 1], it can be arbitrarily large, right? I have to say I don't really know how to word this to make it clearer that a percentage is not returned despite the name. Also I guess that whatever we improve should be done similarly in the docstring because I would say the reference API doc is likely where people are going to go for information first.
|
Indeed you can make an error of 200%. We need to reformulate and drop the notion of upper bound. |
Maybe give an example where the error is 1 (or 100%) in the user guide to clarify that the returned value is 1 and not 100?
|
Indeed sorry for the misleading comment. Still I think the fact that it's consistent with our convention that 1.0 returned by Any volunteer for a follow-up PR to fix this? |
Reference Issues/PRs
What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.
Any other comments?