This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 1, 2022. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 53
[Feat] Test LightGBM based on XGboost Operator #56
Labels
Comments
Issue-Label Bot is automatically applying the labels:
Please mark this comment with 👍 or 👎 to give our bot feedback! |
/assign |
/assign |
Hmm this is XGBoost operator though. We should probably aim to provide better support and experience for XGBoost users. I don’t think LightGBM would need to be supported here. |
Yes, I totally agree that we need to provide better user experience for
XGBoost. For example, better Python SDK.
we can keep in mind that XGboost operator could be for any boosting tree
related algorithm. Now, more and more groups are using LGBM. We can leave
this into minor priority.
…On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 1:15 PM Yuan Tang ***@***.***> wrote:
Hmm this is XGBoost operator though. We should probably aim to provide
better supporting experience for XGBoost users. I don’t think LightGBM
would need to be supported here.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#56 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAK5R6LCA473ZF2MKHJYE6DRQ4DN7ANCNFSM4M44RIPQ>
.
|
merlintang
changed the title
Test LightGBM based on XGboost Operator
[Feat] Test LightGBM based on XGboost Operator
May 11, 2020
Leave this for further work. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
LightGBM is also popular for the boosting tree model, thus, it is natural to demo or test how LGBM to run over XGboost Operator.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: