-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 223
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
Review data_type in meta #807
Comments
mauicv
changed the title
Not isolated to this PR, but noting that we seem to be a little inconsistent across the new and old outlier detectors wrt to when
Review data_type in meta
Jun 12, 2023
data_type
is hard-coded, and when it is optionally set via a kwarg. For some, it is hardcoded to time-series
(which makes sense), for some (e.g. the old Mahalanobis
) it is set via kwarg, and for some it is hard coded to numeric
. Maybe worth opening an issue to review this more generally?
In the case of the new outlier detectors, the expectation is that they're all tabular-numeric. If the user has image or text data they need to do some preprocessing first. This assumption isn't true for detectors like the old mahalanobis outlier detector which can take categorical or numeric data for instance. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Originally posted by @ascillitoe in #746 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: