[R-package] [docs] clarify shape of predictions #5384
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
Co-authored-by: Michael Mayer <mayermichael79@gmail.com>
jmoralez
approved these changes
Jul 22, 2022
StrikerRUS
approved these changes
Jul 24, 2022
40 tasks
|
This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity since it was closed. To start a new related discussion, open a new issue at https://github.com/microsoft/LightGBM/issues including a reference to this. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In #5223, @mayer79 pointed out that the R package's documentation doesn't currently describe how to interpret
leaforcontribpredictions for multiclass objectives.This PR proposes adding such documentation to help users and developers creating extensions like
{shapviz}and{SHAPforxgboost}.See #5223 (comment) for specific evidence supporting what's being proposed here.
@mayer79 if you have time, we'd be grateful for a review on this from you as well. No rush on that.... the project's CI is currently broken anyway 😬 (#5362 (comment))