[MRG+2] Faster Gradient Boosting Decision Trees with binned features by NicolasHug · Pull Request #12807 · scikit-learn/scikit-learn

NicolasHug · 2018-12-17T21:46:34Z

This PR proposes a new implementation for Gradient Boosting Decision Trees. This isn't meant to be a replacement of the current sklearn implementation but rather an addition.

This addresses the second bullet point from #8231.

This is a port from pygbm (with @ogrisel, in Numba), which itself uses lots of the optimizations from LightGBM.

Algorithm details and refs

The proposed algorithm roughly corresponds to the 'approximate' variant of the XGBoost paper, except that the data is binned at the very beginning of the training process, instead of at each node of the trees.
See also Algorithm 1 of the LightGBM paper. Section 2.1 is worth a read.
For refresher or general background on GBDTs: The elements of statistical learning. The XGBoost paper is also pretty good.

The main differences with the current sklearn implementation are:

Before training, the data is binned into equally-spaced bins (up to 256 bins), which considerably reduces the number of split points to consider. The other advantage is that the data becomes integer-valued, which is faster to handle than real-valued data.
Newton method is used instead of gradient descent

Notes to reviewers

This is going to be a lot of work to review, so please feel free to tell me if there's anything I can do / add that could ease reviewing.

Here's a list of things that probably need to be discussed at some point or that are worth pointing out.

The code is a port of pygbm (from numba to cython). I've ported all the tests as well. So a huge part of the code has already been carefully reviewed (or written) by @ogrisel. There are still a few non-trivial changes to the pygbm's code, to accommodate for the numba -> cython translation.
Like [MRG] new K-means implementation for improved performances #11950, this PR uses OpenMP parallelism with Cython
The code is in sklearn/ensemble._hist_gradient_boosting and the estimators are exposed in sklearn.experimental (which is created here, as a result of a discussion during the Paris sprint).
Y_DTYPE and the associated C type for targets y is double and not float, because with float the numerical checks (test_loss.py) would not pass. Maybe at some point we'll want to also allow floats since using doubles uses twice as much space (which is not negligible, see the attributes of the Splitter class). Like in LightGBM, the targets y, gains, values, and sums of gradient / hessians are doubles, and the gradients and hessians array are floats to save space (14c7d47).
I have only added a short note in the User Guide about the new estimators. I think that the gradient boosting section of the user guide could benefit from an in-depth rewriting. I'd be happy to do that, but in a later PR.
Currently the parallel code uses all possible threads. Do we want to expose n_jobs (openmp-wise, not joblib of course)?
The estimator names are currently HistGradientBoostingClassifier and HistGradientBoostingRegressor.

API differences with current implementation:

Happy to discuss these points of course. In general I tried to match the parameters names with those of the current GBDTs.

New features:

early stopping can be checked with an arbitrary scorer, not just with the loss
validation_fraction can also be an int to specify absolute size of the validation set (not just a proportion)

Changed parameters and attributes:

the losses parameters have different names. I personally think that 'deviance' is just obfuscating for logistic loss.
the n_estimators parameter has been changed to max_iter because unlike the current GBDTs implementations, the underlying "predictor" aren't estimators. They are private and have no fit method. Also, in multiclass classification we build C * max_iter
the estimators_ attribute has been removed for the same reason.
train_score_ is of size n_estimators + 1 instead of n_estimators because it contains the score of the 0th iteration (before the boosting process).
oob_improvement_ is replaced by validation_score_, also with size n_estimators + 1

Unsupported parameters and attributes:

subsample (doesn't really make sense here)
criterion (same)
min_samples_split is not supported, but min_samples_leaf is supported.
anything samples_weights-related
min_impurity_decrease is not supported (we have min_gain_to_split but it is not exposed in the public API)
warm_start
max_features (probably not needed)
staged_decision_function, staged_predict_proba, etc.
init estimator
feature_importances_
the loss_ attribute is not exposed.
Only least squares loss is supported for regression. No least absolute error, huber or quantile loss.

Future improvement, for later PRs (no specific order):

Implement categorical variables support (what to do if there are more than 256 categories?)
Allow for more than 256 bins (requires to "dynamically" encode bins as uint8 or uint32)
Implement handling of missing values
Implement fast PDPs
BinMapper is doing almost the same job as KBinDiscretizer (but it's parallelized) so we could eventually integrate it.
Parallelize loss computations (should speed up early stopping when scoring=='loss')
Find a way to avoid computing predictions of all the trees when checking early stopping with a scorer. At the same time, this could avoid the _in_fit hackish attribute.

Benchmarks

Done on my laptop, intel i5 7th Gen, 4 cores, 8GB Ram.

TLDR:

considerably faster than the current sklearn implem
faster than XGBoost ('hist' method)
faster than CatBoost (not shown here because catboost is much slower than the others and would flatten the plots)
very close to lightgbm. In terms of prediction accuracy results are comparable.

Details

Comparison between proposed PR and current estimators:

on binary classification only, I don't think it's really needed to do more since the performance difference is striking. Note that for larger sample sizes the current estimators simply cannot run because of the sorting step that never terminates. I don't provide the benchmark code, it's exactly the same as that of benchmarks/bench_fast_gradient_boosting.py:

Comparison between proposed PR and LightGBM / XGBoost:

On the Higgs-Boson dataset:
python benchmarks/bench_hist_gradient_boosting_higgsboson.py --lightgbm --xgboost --subsample 5000000 --n-trees 50

Sklearn: done in 28.787s, ROC AUC: 0.7330, ACC: 0.7346
LightGBM: done in 27.595s, ROC AUC: 0.7333, ACC: 0.7349
XGBoost: done in 41.726s, ROC AUC: 0.7335, ACC: 0.7351

Entire log:

~/dev/sklearn(branch:gbm*) » python benchmarks/bench_hist_gradient_boosting_higgsboson.py --subsample 5000000 --n-trees 50 --lightgbm --xgboost                                    nico@cotier
Training set with 5000000 records with 28 features.
Fitting a sklearn model...
Binning 1.120 GB of data: 3.665 s
Fitting gradient boosted rounds:
[1/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 7, in 0.595s
[2/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 9, in 0.602s
[3/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 9, in 0.575s
[4/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 12, in 0.552s
[5/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 11, in 0.583s
[6/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 9, in 0.578s
[7/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 11, in 0.561s
[8/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 10, in 0.524s
[9/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 9, in 0.566s
[10/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 10, in 0.552s
[11/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 14, in 0.523s
[12/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 15, in 0.538s
[13/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 11, in 0.501s
[14/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 12, in 0.522s
[15/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 10, in 0.546s
[16/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 9, in 0.409s
[17/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 13, in 0.457s
[18/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 10, in 0.520s
[19/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 13, in 0.463s
[20/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 10, in 0.399s
[21/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 11, in 0.463s
[22/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 9, in 0.356s
[23/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 8, in 0.529s
[24/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 8, in 0.460s
[25/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 9, in 0.414s
[26/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 8, in 0.516s
[27/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 10, in 0.427s
[28/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 8, in 0.460s
[29/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 7, in 0.445s
[30/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 12, in 0.535s
[31/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 10, in 0.498s
[32/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 12, in 0.521s
[33/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 12, in 0.503s
[34/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 10, in 0.410s
[35/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 9, in 0.368s
[36/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 10, in 0.267s
[37/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 8, in 0.460s
[38/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 11, in 0.500s
[39/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 8, in 0.421s
[40/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 8, in 0.391s
[41/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 9, in 0.502s
[42/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 9, in 0.444s
[43/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 7, in 0.366s
[44/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 8, in 0.473s
[45/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 9, in 0.386s
[46/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 11, in 0.411s
[47/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 8, in 0.457s
[48/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 10, in 0.526s
[49/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 8, in 0.535s
[50/50] 1 tree, 31 leaves, max depth = 10, in 0.487s
Fit 50 trees in 28.738 s, (1550 total leaves)
Time spent finding best splits:  17.347s
Time spent applying splits:      2.356s
Time spent predicting:           1.428s
done in 28.787s, ROC AUC: 0.7330, ACC: 0.7346
Fitting a LightGBM model...
[LightGBM] [Warning] min_sum_hessian_in_leaf is set=0.001, min_child_weight=0.001 will be ignored. Current value: min_sum_hessian_in_leaf=0.001
[LightGBM] [Warning] min_sum_hessian_in_leaf is set=0.001, min_child_weight=0.001 will be ignored. Current value: min_sum_hessian_in_leaf=0.001
[LightGBM] [Warning] Starting from the 2.1.2 version, default value for the "boost_from_average" parameter in "binary" objective is true.
This may cause significantly different results comparing to the previous versions of LightGBM.
Try to set boost_from_average=false, if your old models produce bad results
[LightGBM] [Info] Number of positive: 2649426, number of negative: 2350574
[LightGBM] [Info] Total Bins 6143
[LightGBM] [Info] Number of data: 5000000, number of used features: 28
[LightGBM] [Info] [binary:BoostFromScore]: pavg=0.529885 -> initscore=0.119683
[LightGBM] [Info] Start training from score 0.119683
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 7
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 9
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 11
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 11
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 10
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 13
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 11
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 11
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 10
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 11
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 9
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 12
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 11
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 9
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 10
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 12
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 13
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 9
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 9
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 9
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 10
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 9
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 10
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 11
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 10
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 9
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 12
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 11
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 10
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 10
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 10
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 15
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 11
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 12
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 9
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 10
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 11
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 11
[LightGBM] [Debug] Trained a tree with leaves = 31 and max_depth = 8
done in 27.595s, ROC AUC: 0.7333, ACC: 0.7349
Fitting an XGBoost model...
[16:33:14] Tree method is selected to be 'hist', which uses a single updater grow_fast_histmaker.
[16:33:24] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=7
[16:33:25] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:26] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:26] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=8
[16:33:27] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=10
[16:33:28] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:29] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:29] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=12
[16:33:30] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=10
[16:33:31] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=12
[16:33:31] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=11
[16:33:32] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=13
[16:33:33] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=10
[16:33:33] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=10
[16:33:34] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:35] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:35] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=11
[16:33:36] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:36] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=10
[16:33:37] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=12
[16:33:38] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=10
[16:33:38] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=10
[16:33:39] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:39] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=10
[16:33:40] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=12
[16:33:41] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=10
[16:33:41] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=8
[16:33:42] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:42] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:43] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=12
[16:33:44] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:44] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=8
[16:33:45] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=7
[16:33:45] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=11
[16:33:46] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=7
[16:33:47] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=7
[16:33:47] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:48] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:48] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:49] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:50] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:50] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=10
[16:33:50] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:51] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=8
[16:33:52] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=10
[16:33:52] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=11
[16:33:53] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=8
[16:33:53] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=11
[16:33:54] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=9
[16:33:54] /workspace/src/tree/updater_prune.cc:74: tree pruning end, 1 roots, 60 extra nodes, 0 pruned nodes, max_depth=12
done in 41.726s, ROC AUC: 0.7335, ACC: 0.7351

regression task:
python benchmarks/bench_hist_gradient_boosting.py --lightgbm --xgboost --problem regression --n-samples-max 5000000 --n-trees 50
Binary classification task:
python benchmarks/bench_hist_gradient_boosting.py --lightgbm --xgboost --problem classification --n-classes 2 --n-samples-max 5000000 --n-trees 50

multiclass classification task:
python benchmarks/bench_hist_gradient_boosting.py --lightgbm --xgboost --problem classification --n-classes 3 --n-samples-max 5000000 --n-trees 50

…ction

NicolasHug · 2019-04-26T14:47:20Z

So what you mean is that the fix is OK?

thomasjpfan · 2019-04-26T15:13:06Z

The fix is okay, we should include a comment on why the fix is needed.

ogrisel · 2019-04-26T16:13:21Z

Still mysterious to me

coverage run is using is looking up it's configuration file by default from $PWD/.coveragerc. Because we do not run that command from the source repo root folder, but from a empty TEST_DIR subfolder, it did not pick up the configuration and used the default line-by-line coverage reporting which cannot be combined with the branch/arc-based coverage report.

ogrisel · 2019-04-26T18:24:18Z

@NicolasHug I fixed the coverage thingy. Reading the coverage report, there is a bunch of things that we could improve with respect to test coverage. But this is experimental and I don't want to delay the merge further. Let's merge once my last commit is green on CI.

ogrisel · 2019-04-26T19:14:50Z

I cannot get coverage to ignore the setup.py files for some reason. Anyways, let's merge.

NicolasHug · 2019-04-26T20:27:13Z

\o/

Awesome, thanks a lot everyone for the help and the reviews!!

glemaitre · 2019-04-26T21:27:25Z

@ogrisel @NicolasHug really nice job for this feature!!!

…cikit-learn#12807)

…eatures (scikit-learn#12807)" This reverts commit 5392234.

…cikit-learn#12807)

GaelVaroquaux · 2019-05-02T07:34:05Z

Congratulations on this work! This is so important.

Also, I love the way that the "experimental" import was handled. Beautiful choice! It should stand as a reference for the future in similar situations.

…cikit-learn#12807)

NicolasHug mentioned this pull request Dec 21, 2018

MAINT Use Cython memoryviews #10624

Closed

NicolasHug mentioned this pull request Jan 2, 2019

MNT simplify some tree code with memoryviews #12886

Merged

NicolasHug added 28 commits January 13, 2019 14:39

Unified type imports in types

2f0c93a

Tried parallelize prediction but doesn't work :(

ca4d144

made tests use types in types.pyx instead of hardcoded types

67602e5

lgbm tests are passsing \o/

498fe50

Added binary classification support

889d39f

Added multiclass classification support, all tests are passing \o/

722a982

Parallelize predictions

1ea65e2

removed get_threads_chunks

e9c2509

n_features param to test script

cf3f723

Specified array alignments in splitting and histogram

c6227cd

used const views where possible and used prange sum reduction

10520da

Directly pass sum_gradient and sum_hessians to find_node_split_subtra…

2a80af8

…ction

local variables to avoid python interactions

6fafd85

split_indices is now a method

dac76a1

find_node_split is now a method

3614a7e

find_node_split_subtraction is now a method

8e8b927

find_node_split_subtraction is now a method

1fac60a

Refactored SplittingContext into a proper Splitter

f8500a2

lots of cosmetics

c4d00f0

fixed test segfault

628ea61

init file for tests

5d8c21a

renamed estimators

35343f2

made module private and estimators are available in ensemble

d0f73cd

pep8

af23bec

some comments

2fd29e1

checkpoint before changing scoring param

5a82534

Fixed bug in update_raw_predictions

ae4640e

small optimization for root node splitting

ec5128c

NicolasHug and others added 4 commits April 26, 2019 11:16

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into gbm

ac40e4d

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into gbm

55152cd

MAINT coverage config for test_pytest_soft_dependency.sh

962c5e4

Try to omit any setup.py file from the coverage report

10cb5be

ogrisel added 5 commits April 26, 2019 18:34

TEST_DIR is not a subfolder of BUILD_SOURCESDIRECTORY

8adb9f0

One more try

406cec1

coverage combine in TEST_DIR

9d8269a

remove useless pass

d63d9db

omit */setup.py

280c487

ogrisel merged commit 9f68c99 into scikit-learn:master Apr 26, 2019

xhluca pushed a commit to xhluca/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Apr 28, 2019

[MRG+2] Faster Gradient Boosting Decision Trees with binned features (s…

5392234

…cikit-learn#12807)

xhluca pushed a commit to xhluca/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Apr 28, 2019

Revert "[MRG+2] Faster Gradient Boosting Decision Trees with binned f…

34b22dc

…eatures (scikit-learn#12807)" This reverts commit 5392234.

xhluca pushed a commit to xhluca/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Apr 28, 2019

Revert "[MRG+2] Faster Gradient Boosting Decision Trees with binned f…

9d233be

…eatures (scikit-learn#12807)" This reverts commit 5392234.

marcelobeckmann pushed a commit to marcelobeckmann/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request May 1, 2019

[MRG+2] Faster Gradient Boosting Decision Trees with binned features (s…

9fd98c7

…cikit-learn#12807)

marcelobeckmann pushed a commit to marcelobeckmann/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request May 1, 2019

[MRG+2] Faster Gradient Boosting Decision Trees with binned features (s…

b99aacc

…cikit-learn#12807)

NicolasHug mentioned this pull request May 8, 2019

[MRG] Update roadmap #13809

Merged

koenvandevelde pushed a commit to koenvandevelde/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Jul 12, 2019

[MRG+2] Faster Gradient Boosting Decision Trees with binned features (s…

301d5cf

…cikit-learn#12807)

NicolasHug mentioned this pull request Apr 2, 2021

MNT Remove HistGradientBoosting from experimental #19799

Merged

lorentzenchr mentioned this pull request Oct 22, 2022

[RFC] Gradient Boosting improvement #8231

Closed

2 tasks

vitaliset mentioned this pull request Feb 26, 2023

ENH HistGradientBoosting estimators should have .feature_importances_ attribute #25707

Open

lorentzenchr mentioned this pull request Nov 29, 2023

RFC Unify old GradientBoosting estimators and HGBT #27873

Open

sebp mentioned this pull request Aug 18, 2024

Histogram-based Gradient Boosting survival models sebp/scikit-survival#473

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

[MRG+2] Faster Gradient Boosting Decision Trees with binned features#12807

[MRG+2] Faster Gradient Boosting Decision Trees with binned features#12807
ogrisel merged 276 commits intoscikit-learn:masterfrom
NicolasHug:gbm

NicolasHug commented Dec 17, 2018 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

NicolasHug commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

thomasjpfan commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

ogrisel commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

ogrisel commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

ogrisel commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

NicolasHug commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

glemaitre commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

GaelVaroquaux commented May 2, 2019

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

11 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

NicolasHug commented Dec 17, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Algorithm details and refs

Notes to reviewers

API differences with current implementation:

New features:

Changed parameters and attributes:

Unsupported parameters and attributes:

Future improvement, for later PRs (no specific order):

Benchmarks

Comparison between proposed PR and current estimators:

Comparison between proposed PR and LightGBM / XGBoost:

Uh oh!

NicolasHug commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

thomasjpfan commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

ogrisel commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

ogrisel commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

ogrisel commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

NicolasHug commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

glemaitre commented Apr 26, 2019

Uh oh!

GaelVaroquaux commented May 2, 2019

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

11 participants

NicolasHug commented Dec 17, 2018 •

edited

Loading