data mining - elki-cli versus elki gui, I don't get equal results -
though terminal on ubuntu:
db@morris:~/lisbet/elki-master/elki/target$ elki-cli -algorithm outlier.lof.lof -dbc.parser arffparser -dbc.in /home/db/lisbet/alldata/literature/wbc/wbc_withoutdupl_norm_v10_no_ids.arff -lof.k 8 -evaluator outlier.outlierroccurve -rocauc.positive yes
giving # rocauc: 0.6230046948356808
and in elki's gui:
running: -verbose -dbc.in /home/db/lisbet/alldata/literature/wbc/wbc_withoutdupl_norm_v10_no_ids.arff -dbc.parser arffparser -algorithm outlier.lof.lof -lof.k 8 -evaluator outlier.outlierroccurve -rocauc.positive yes de.lmu.ifi.dbs.elki.datasource.filebaseddatabaseconnection.parse: 18 ms de.lmu.ifi.dbs.elki.datasource.filebaseddatabaseconnection.filter: 0 ms lof #1/3: materializing lof neighborhoods. de.lmu.ifi.dbs.elki.index.preprocessed.knn.materializeknnpreprocessor.k: 9 materializing k nearest neighbors (k=9): 223 [100%] de.lmu.ifi.dbs.elki.index.preprocessed.knn.materializeknnpreprocessor.precomputation-time: 10 ms lof #2/3: computing lrds. lof #3/3: computing lofs. lof: complete. de.lmu.ifi.dbs.elki.algorithm.outlier.lof.lof.runtime: 39 ms rocauc: **0.6220657276995305**
i don't understand why 2 rocauccurves aren't same.
my goal in testing comfortable result, right, hard when don't matching results. when see settings right move on making own experiments, can trust.
pass cli
first command line parameter launche cli, or minigui
launch minigui. following equivalent:
java -jar elki/target/elki-0.6.5-snapshot.jar cli java -jar elki/target/elki-0.6.5-snapshot.jar kddcliapplication java -jar elki/target/elki-0.6.5-snapshot.jar de.lmu.ifi.dbs.elki.application.kddcliapplication
this work class extending class abstractapplication
.
your can do:
java -cp elki/target/elki-0.6.5-snapshot.jar de.lmu.ifi.dbs.elki.application.kddcliapplication
(which load 1 class less, not worth effort.)
this work class has standard public void main(string[])
method, standard java invocation.
but notice -h
still print 0.6.0 (2014, january)
, value not updated 0.6.5 interim versions. bumped 0.7.0
. version number therefore not reliable.
as differences observed: try varing k
1. if recall correctly, changed meaning of k parameter more consistent across different algorithms. (they not consistent in literature anyway.)
Comments
Post a Comment