Skip to content

[MRG] t-SNE perplexity docstring update#13069

Merged
jnothman merged 3 commits intoscikit-learn:masterfrom
kjacks21:tsne-doc-fix
Apr 14, 2019
Merged

[MRG] t-SNE perplexity docstring update#13069
jnothman merged 3 commits intoscikit-learn:masterfrom
kjacks21:tsne-doc-fix

Conversation

@kjacks21
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Reference Issues/PRs

Addresses #13040

What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.

Updating the perplexity parameter docstring in order to show that the perplexity value does impact the results more than what the current docstring implied.

between 5 and 50. The choice is not extremely critical since t-SNE
is quite insensitive to this parameter.
between 5 and 50. While the choice is not extremely critical, results
have been shown to change considerably across perplexity values.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That sounds a bit contradictory. Why not simply remove the entire sentence?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@kjacks21 kjacks21 Mar 21, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it is important for the user to know that results can change considerably across perplexity values. I could either remove the sentence or do something like:

Changing the perplexity value can significantly impact the result.

Either way, I think at the very least the sentence should be removed.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 for your proposition

usually require a larger perplexity. Consider selecting a value
between 5 and 50. While the choice is not extremely critical, results
have been shown to change considerably across perplexity values.
between 5 and 50. Different values can result in significanlty different results.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@NicolasHug the one I previously proposed made it seem like it was suggesting that changing the value from the default (30) would impact the results, hence this wording.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The wording is fine to me, but the checks are failing since the line is too long. Please wrap around 79 characters

@jnothman jnothman merged commit 645d322 into scikit-learn:master Apr 14, 2019
@jnothman
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Thanks @kjacks21

jeremiedbb pushed a commit to jeremiedbb/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2019
xhluca pushed a commit to xhluca/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Apr 28, 2019
xhluca pushed a commit to xhluca/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Apr 28, 2019
xhluca pushed a commit to xhluca/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Apr 28, 2019
koenvandevelde pushed a commit to koenvandevelde/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Jul 12, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants