Hi,

I have a data.frame with dimension  336x336 called *training*, and 
*observation* which is 336x1. I combined them as one table using 
table=data.frame(training, observation). table now has 336x337 dimension with 
the last column as the observation to learn using the training data of the rest 
of the column in the table. For prediction, i combined the testing data and 
observation and pass it like predict(model,testingWTesingObservation)


I've used the formula: rpart(table[,337] ~ ., data=table) or svm(table[,337] ~ 
., data=table). I recently discovered that this formulation produces different 
model from the: svm(training, observation) formulation. Which is correct and 
why one of them is not correct? I thought that syntactically, both are the same.

Regards,
Paul

        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.

Reply via email to