Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Thanks you for developing this tool!
When I was using it on my data, I found multiple times that the process get stuck when calling
smECE(pred,y). In the end, I realized that it was due to the inefficient implementation ofnp.convolve. I suggest thatsp.signal.convolvebe used, as it uses FFT to speed up calculation. This difference has also been pointed out in https://stackoverflow.com/questions/53550764/python-numpy-is-there-a-faster-way-to-convolve.I have attached an example I came across on real data: debug_y_33.5.modify_affix_to_npy.txt
debug_pred_33.5.modify_affix_to_npy.txt (Github doesn't allow
.npyfiles to be uploaded, so please change the affix back to.npy)The results are:
sp.signal.convolve: Time = 0.065s, smECE = 0.006961np.convolve:sp.signalimplementation.