Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarify and add sampling methods #3

Closed
nredell opened this issue Sep 24, 2019 · 3 comments
Closed

Clarify and add sampling methods #3

nredell opened this issue Sep 24, 2019 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@nredell
Copy link
Owner

nredell commented Sep 24, 2019

The sampling method(s) in the package need to be more clearly spelled out. There are a of couple related methods in the literature that I'd like to incorporate. Namely, there should be a clear trade-off that the user can make between sampling instances vs. features. Right now, the stochastic-ness in the algorithm is to sample a random instance and shuffle its features in one go...but there might be benefit to sampling one instance and shuffling its features multiple times. Seems like both approaches would converge in the limit but the whole point of the Monte Carlo approach is that we're nowhere near "the limit". Also, the impact of feature dependence needs to be worked out. I've done some reading here but I'm not confident about what the best approach is.

@nredell nredell added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 24, 2019
@nredell
Copy link
Owner Author

nredell commented Sep 29, 2019

Added argument shapFlex(shuffle = ...) which supports the explore, exploit trade off. Need to run some simulations to look at parameter recovery along this scale.

@nredell
Copy link
Owner Author

nredell commented Nov 12, 2019

This is a great paper about asymmetric Shapley values and causality (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1910.06358.pdf). The implementation is fairly straightforward; though, the API needs some thought when having the user specify causal constraints. lavaan and r-causal are possible approaches, but I'm not a huge fan of specifying constraints in one long string. I need to look more into their and other implementations. In any case, this is next on the implementation list because it's an infinitely useful iml method.

@nredell
Copy link
Owner Author

nredell commented Jan 5, 2020

We're going to go ahead and close this out. This package has gone full "causal".

@nredell nredell closed this as completed Jan 5, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant