Why would one crossvalidate the random state number?Linear kernel in SVM performing much worse than RBF or PolyWhy is the number of samples smaller than the number of values in my decision tree?How does one fine-tune parameters and weights at the same time?Predicting contract churn/cancellation: Great model results does not work in the real worldWhy is this Random Forest perfect?Why would a fake feature with random numbers get selected in feature importance?Random state in machine learning modelsIs a good shuffle random state for training data really good for the model?Why is the reported loss different from the mean squared error calculated on the train data?Why is my MLP with 2 features is doing worse than MLP with 1 feature where the one feature is a combination of feature1*feature2?
Krull dimension of the ring of global sections
What is a common way to tell if an academic is "above average," or outstanding in their field? Is their h-index (Hirsh index) one of them?
When did England stop being a Papal fief?
Where to draw the line between quantum mechanics theory and its interpretation(s)?
How do I, as a DM, handle a party that decides to set up an ambush in a dungeon?
What to do when scriptures go against conscience?
weird pluperfect subjunctive in Eutropius
How to properly store the current value of int variable into a token list?
Speed up this NIntegrate
How can a hefty sand storm happen in a thin atmosphere like Martian?
Clarification of algebra in moment generating functions
Would a "Permanence" spell in 5e be overpowered?
Gerrymandering Puzzle - Rig the Election
Meaning of the (idiomatic?) expression "seghe mentali"
In linear regression why does regularisation penalise the parameter values as well?
My large rocket is still flipping over
How to deal with employer who keeps me at work after working hours
In Futurama, how many beings has Leela slept with?
Would a small hole in a Faraday cage drastically reduce its effectiveness at blocking interference?
Is any special diet an effective treatment of autism?
Understanding ties
Why does sound not move through a wall?
Dangerous workplace travelling
Some Russian letters overlap the next line of text when used in drop caps
Why would one crossvalidate the random state number?
Linear kernel in SVM performing much worse than RBF or PolyWhy is the number of samples smaller than the number of values in my decision tree?How does one fine-tune parameters and weights at the same time?Predicting contract churn/cancellation: Great model results does not work in the real worldWhy is this Random Forest perfect?Why would a fake feature with random numbers get selected in feature importance?Random state in machine learning modelsIs a good shuffle random state for training data really good for the model?Why is the reported loss different from the mean squared error calculated on the train data?Why is my MLP with 2 features is doing worse than MLP with 1 feature where the one feature is a combination of feature1*feature2?
$begingroup$
Still learning about machine learning, I've stumbled across a kaggle (link) which I cannot understand.
Here are the lines 72 and 73:
parameters = 'solver': ['lbfgs'],
'max_iter': [1000,1100,1200,1300,1400,1500,1600,1700,1800,1900,2000 ],
'alpha': 10.0 ** -np.arange(1, 10),
'hidden_layer_sizes':np.arange(10, 15),
'random_state':[0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
clf = GridSearchCV(MLPClassifier(), parameters, n_jobs=-1)
As you can see, the random_state parameter is been tested across 10 values.
What is the point of doing this?
If one model perform better with some random_state, does it make any sense to use this particular parameter on other models?
scikit-learn mlp
asked 4 hours ago
Dan ChaltielDan Chaltiel
1757
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Still learning about machine learning, I've stumbled across a kaggle (link) which I cannot understand.
Here are the lines 72 and 73:
parameters = 'solver': ['lbfgs'],
'max_iter': [1000,1100,1200,1300,1400,1500,1600,1700,1800,1900,2000 ],
'alpha': 10.0 ** -np.arange(1, 10),
'hidden_layer_sizes':np.arange(10, 15),
'random_state':[0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
clf = GridSearchCV(MLPClassifier(), parameters, n_jobs=-1)
As you can see, the random_state parameter is been tested across 10 values.
What is the point of doing this?
If one model perform better with some random_state, does it make any sense to use this particular parameter on other models?
scikit-learn mlp
asked 4 hours ago
Dan ChaltielDan Chaltiel
1757
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Still learning about machine learning, I've stumbled across a kaggle (link) which I cannot understand.
Here are the lines 72 and 73:
parameters = 'solver': ['lbfgs'],
'max_iter': [1000,1100,1200,1300,1400,1500,1600,1700,1800,1900,2000 ],
'alpha': 10.0 ** -np.arange(1, 10),
'hidden_layer_sizes':np.arange(10, 15),
'random_state':[0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
clf = GridSearchCV(MLPClassifier(), parameters, n_jobs=-1)
As you can see, the random_state parameter is been tested across 10 values.
What is the point of doing this?
If one model perform better with some random_state, does it make any sense to use this particular parameter on other models?
scikit-learn mlp
asked 4 hours ago
Dan ChaltielDan Chaltiel
1757
$endgroup$
Still learning about machine learning, I've stumbled across a kaggle (link) which I cannot understand.
Here are the lines 72 and 73:
parameters = 'solver': ['lbfgs'],
'max_iter': [1000,1100,1200,1300,1400,1500,1600,1700,1800,1900,2000 ],
'alpha': 10.0 ** -np.arange(1, 10),
'hidden_layer_sizes':np.arange(10, 15),
'random_state':[0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
clf = GridSearchCV(MLPClassifier(), parameters, n_jobs=-1)
As you can see, the random_state parameter is been tested across 10 values.
What is the point of doing this?
If one model perform better with some random_state, does it make any sense to use this particular parameter on other models?
scikit-learn mlp
scikit-learn mlp
asked 4 hours ago
Dan ChaltielDan Chaltiel
1757
asked 4 hours ago
Dan ChaltielDan Chaltiel
1757
asked 4 hours ago
Dan ChaltielDan Chaltiel
1757
asked 4 hours ago
Dan ChaltielDan Chaltiel
1757
asked 4 hours ago
Dan ChaltielDan Chaltiel
1757
1757
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I personally think that the general idea of optimising your model with different random seeds is not a good idea. There are many other, more important, aspects of the modelling process that you can worry about, tweak and compare before spending time on the effects of random initialisation.
That being said, if you just want to test the effect of random initialisation of model weights on a final validation metric, this could be an approach to do so. Kind of the reverse argument to my point above. If you can show for different random seeds (ceteris paribus: with all other parameters equal) that the final model performs differently, it shows maybe that their is either inconsistency in the model, or a bug in the code even. I would not expect a well-validated model to give hugely differing results if being run with a different random seed, so if it does, it tells me something weird is going on!
answered 4 hours ago
n1k31t4n1k31t4
6,9462422
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "557"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdatascience.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f51397%2fwhy-would-one-crossvalidate-the-random-state-number%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I personally think that the general idea of optimising your model with different random seeds is not a good idea. There are many other, more important, aspects of the modelling process that you can worry about, tweak and compare before spending time on the effects of random initialisation.
That being said, if you just want to test the effect of random initialisation of model weights on a final validation metric, this could be an approach to do so. Kind of the reverse argument to my point above. If you can show for different random seeds (ceteris paribus: with all other parameters equal) that the final model performs differently, it shows maybe that their is either inconsistency in the model, or a bug in the code even. I would not expect a well-validated model to give hugely differing results if being run with a different random seed, so if it does, it tells me something weird is going on!
answered 4 hours ago
n1k31t4n1k31t4
6,9462422
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I personally think that the general idea of optimising your model with different random seeds is not a good idea. There are many other, more important, aspects of the modelling process that you can worry about, tweak and compare before spending time on the effects of random initialisation.
That being said, if you just want to test the effect of random initialisation of model weights on a final validation metric, this could be an approach to do so. Kind of the reverse argument to my point above. If you can show for different random seeds (ceteris paribus: with all other parameters equal) that the final model performs differently, it shows maybe that their is either inconsistency in the model, or a bug in the code even. I would not expect a well-validated model to give hugely differing results if being run with a different random seed, so if it does, it tells me something weird is going on!
answered 4 hours ago
n1k31t4n1k31t4
6,9462422
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I personally think that the general idea of optimising your model with different random seeds is not a good idea. There are many other, more important, aspects of the modelling process that you can worry about, tweak and compare before spending time on the effects of random initialisation.
That being said, if you just want to test the effect of random initialisation of model weights on a final validation metric, this could be an approach to do so. Kind of the reverse argument to my point above. If you can show for different random seeds (ceteris paribus: with all other parameters equal) that the final model performs differently, it shows maybe that their is either inconsistency in the model, or a bug in the code even. I would not expect a well-validated model to give hugely differing results if being run with a different random seed, so if it does, it tells me something weird is going on!
answered 4 hours ago
n1k31t4n1k31t4
6,9462422
$endgroup$
I personally think that the general idea of optimising your model with different random seeds is not a good idea. There are many other, more important, aspects of the modelling process that you can worry about, tweak and compare before spending time on the effects of random initialisation.
That being said, if you just want to test the effect of random initialisation of model weights on a final validation metric, this could be an approach to do so. Kind of the reverse argument to my point above. If you can show for different random seeds (ceteris paribus: with all other parameters equal) that the final model performs differently, it shows maybe that their is either inconsistency in the model, or a bug in the code even. I would not expect a well-validated model to give hugely differing results if being run with a different random seed, so if it does, it tells me something weird is going on!
answered 4 hours ago
n1k31t4n1k31t4
6,9462422
answered 4 hours ago
n1k31t4n1k31t4
6,9462422
answered 4 hours ago
n1k31t4n1k31t4
6,9462422
answered 4 hours ago
n1k31t4n1k31t4
6,9462422
6,9462422
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Data Science Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdatascience.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f51397%2fwhy-would-one-crossvalidate-the-random-state-number%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
