From: Tae-Hoon Chung <thchung_at_tgen.org>

Date: Wed 14 Jul 2004 - 02:46:20 EST

R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list

https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html Received on Wed Jul 14 02:55:29 2004

Date: Wed 14 Jul 2004 - 02:46:20 EST

Thank you Andy.

It seems like this can be the reason for the confusion.
I never thought that there can be this kind of catches for using tune.*
functions.

For the record, I actually emailed to Dr. Friedrich Leisch the author
of this library.

When I get some reply, I will post it also.

Regards,

TH

On Jul 12, 2004, at 6:40 PM, Liaw, Andy wrote:

> Looking at the body of tune(), it has:

*>
**> ...
**> repeat.errors[reps] <- if (is.factor(true.y))
**> 1 - classAgreement(table(pred, true.y))
**> else crossprod(pred - true.y)/length(pred)
**> ...
**>
**> where classAgreement() is a function defined inside tune() that
**> computes the
**> fraction of correctly predicted cases. So it looks like tune() and
**> friends
**> are returning error rates as fractions, not percentages.
**>
**> You're right that the fraction shouldn't be larger than 1. Did you
**> make
**> sure that tune() sees the data as classification, not regression
**> (i.e., did
**> you make sure that the class labels given to tune.*() are factor)?
**>
**> HTH,
**> Andy
*

Tae-Hoon Chung, Ph.D

Post-doctoral Research Fellow

Molecular Diagnostics and Target Validation Division
Translational Genomics Research Institute
1275 W Washington St, Tempe AZ 85281 USA
Phone: 602-343-8724

R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list

https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html Received on Wed Jul 14 02:55:29 2004

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8
: Wed 03 Nov 2004 - 22:54:56 EST
*