Le ven. 30 avr. 2021 à 18:00, Avijit Basak a écrit :
>
> Hi
>
> I would like to vote for *commons-ml*.
Wrong thread (the vote on this one has been cancelled due to being
idle for too long): The new vote is there:
https://markmail.org/message/g5gwof3qdkzyvedc
>>> [...]
Hi
I would like to vote for *commons-ml*.
Thanks & Regards
--Avijit Basak
On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 at 08:12, Paul King wrote:
> I added some more comments relevant to if the proposed algorithm
> belongs somewhere in the commons "math" area back in the Jira:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/ji
I added some more comments relevant to if the proposed algorithm
belongs somewhere in the commons "math" area back in the Jira:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1563
Cheers, Paul.
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 7:26 PM Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Le mer. 21 avr. 2021 à 08:56, Paul King a écr
>>> [...]
> >
> > So currently, IIRC the tally (on creating a dedicated component) is
> > Gilles Sadowski +1
> > Avijit Basak +1
> > Paul King +1
> > And several -1 on the initially suggested name; but the proposed
> > name has been changed early on to "commons-machinelearning"
> > (in order to
> On Apr 21, 2021, at 2:25 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Le mer. 21 avr. 2021 à 08:56, Paul King a écrit :
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 4:12 PM Ralph Goers
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Why are y’all having a long discussion on Vote thread?
>
> Paul King's comments is interesting information that
Le mer. 21 avr. 2021 à 08:56, Paul King a écrit :
>
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 4:12 PM Ralph Goers
> wrote:
> >
> > Why are y’all having a long discussion on Vote thread?
Paul King's comments is interesting information that could
bear on people's decision on the proposal (especially the
licence'
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 4:12 PM Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> Why are y’all having a long discussion on Vote thread?
Fair enough. I am +1 (non-binding).
Cheers, Paul.
> > On Apr 20, 2021, at 10:33 PM, Paul King wrote:
> >
> > Hi Avijit Basak,
> >
> > +1 to thanking you for your offer. Just a couple o
Why are y’all having a long discussion on Vote thread?
Ralph
> On Apr 20, 2021, at 10:33 PM, Paul King wrote:
>
> Hi Avijit Basak,
>
> +1 to thanking you for your offer. Just a couple of comments from
> someone who is only a marginal contributor to the commons project.
>
> I would be keen to
Hi Avijit Basak,
+1 to thanking you for your offer. Just a couple of comments from
someone who is only a marginal contributor to the commons project.
I would be keen to see a new commons component incorporating various
machine learning/data science components. The other main contenders
that seem
Le mar. 20 avr. 2021 à 16:09, Avijit Basak a écrit :
>
> Hi
>
> > Did you ask "Spark" people about their opinion about it?
> -- Not yet. I am not sure what would be the right option for
> this communication. It will be good if you can approach them.
You are the one who propo
Hi
> Did you ask "Spark" people about their opinion about it?
-- Not yet. I am not sure what would be the right option for
this communication. It will be good if you can approach them.
> where it can be used in real-life (performance-wise)
applications, then you sho
Hello.
Le lun. 19 avr. 2021 à 08:35, Avijit Basak a écrit :
>
> Hi
>
> >Isn't a GA inherently parallel?
> >If so, why not take advantage of the concurrency tools provided by the JDK?
> -- Are we planning to implement multi-threading for GA operations even as
> part of a single population
This
Hi
>Isn't a GA inherently parallel?
>If so, why not take advantage of the concurrency tools provided by the JDK?
-- Are we planning to implement multi-threading for GA operations even as
part of a single population or only for multi-population parallel GA.
-- We can implement different types o
Le mar. 13 avr. 2021 à 18:21, Avijit Basak a écrit :
>
> Hi
>
> Please find my comments below.
>
> >> I don't follow the distinction "prod" vs "non-prod".
> -- Actually in Prod we really need a very high performing system. So
> use of implicit parallelism in spark would help us to a
Hi
Please find my comments below.
>> I don't follow the distinction "prod" vs "non-prod".
-- Actually in Prod we really need a very high performing system. So
use of implicit parallelism in spark would help us to achieve it. But for
other types of work like POC or R&D we may not ne
Hello.
Le lun. 12 avr. 2021 à 17:21, Avijit Basak a écrit :
>
> Hi
>
> Sorry for the delayed response. Thanks for your patience. Please
> find my comments below:
>
> (1) Why not Spark? [At least post over there (?).]
> --We can move to Spark. But it will be very much useful if th
Hi
Sorry for the delayed response. Thanks for your patience. Please
find my comments below:
(1) Why not Spark? [At least post over there (?).]
--We can move to Spark. But it will be very much useful if the things
can also run without Spark. The use of Spark would make more sense
Le dim. 14 févr. 2021 à 09:06, Avijit Basak a écrit :
>
> Hi
>
>I would like to mention a few points here. Genetic Algorithm has a
> vast range of applications in optimization and search problems. Machine
> learning is only one of those.
>If we couple the new GA library with any sp
Hi
I would like to mention a few points here. Genetic Algorithm has a
vast range of applications in optimization and search problems. Machine
learning is only one of those.
If we couple the new GA library with any specific domain like ml it
would be meaningless for people working in
Le mer. 10 févr. 2021 à 13:19, sebb a écrit :
>
> Likewise, commons-ml is too cryptic.
>
> Also, the Spark project has a machine-learning library:
>
> https://spark.apache.org/mllib/
Thanks for the pointer.
>
> Maybe that would be better home?
On the face of it, probably.
[For sure, Avijit shou
Le mer. 10 févr. 2021 à 09:27, Emmanuel Bourg a écrit :
>
> -1 for commons-ml for the same reasons.
>
> What about commons-machine-learning or commons-math-learning? The latter
> is as long as commons-configuration.
Java users should be used to lengthy names.
It should thus be "commons-machinelea
Likewise, commons-ml is too cryptic.
Also, the Spark project has a machine-learning library:
https://spark.apache.org/mllib/
Maybe that would be better home?
I'm also a bit concerned as to whether there are sufficient developers
here with knowledge of the ML domain to be able to support the cod
-1 for commons-ml for the same reasons.
What about commons-machine-learning or commons-math-learning? The latter
is as long as commons-configuration.
Emmanuel Bourg
Le 2021-02-10 03:27, Ralph Goers a écrit :
-1 on commons-ml as the name. My first thought is such a repo would
hold stuff rela
-1 on commons-ml as the name. My first thought is such a repo would hold stuff
related to mailing lists. Then again maybe it contains stuff relating to markup
languages. Maybe it is Apache’s version of the ML Programming Language [1].
However, I wouldn’t be -1 on commons-math-ml, although at bes
Hi.
Because of an offered contribution, a discussion happened on
JIRA[1] and in another thread[2] about improving the genetic
algorithm (GA) implementation currently in the
org.apache.commons.math4.genetic
package of the "Commons Math" component.
It would make sense to group "machine learning"
25 matches
Mail list logo
