logicDT.boosting {logicDT} | R Documentation |
Fitting boosted logicDT models
Description
Function for fitting gradient boosted logicDT models.
Usage
## Default S3 method:
logicDT.boosting(
X,
y,
Z = NULL,
boosting.iter = 500,
learning.rate = 0.01,
subsample.frac = 1,
replace = TRUE,
line.search = "min",
...
)
## S3 method for class 'formula'
logicDT.boosting(formula, data, ...)
Arguments
X |
Matrix or data frame of binary predictors coded as 0 or 1. |
y |
Response vector. 0-1 coding for binary responses. Otherwise, a regression task is assumed. |
Z |
Optional matrix or data frame of quantitative/continuous covariables. Multiple covariables allowed for splitting the trees. If leaf regression models (such as four parameter logistic models) shall be fitted, only the first given covariable is used. |
boosting.iter |
Number of boosting iterations |
learning.rate |
Learning rate for boosted models. Values between 0.001 and 0.1 are recommended. |
subsample.frac |
Subsample fraction for each boosting iteration. E.g., 0.5 means that are random draw of 50 is used in each iteration. |
replace |
Should the random draws with subsample.frac
in boosted models be performed with or without
replacement? |
line.search |
Type of line search for gradient boosting.
|
... |
Arguments passed to |
formula |
An object of type |
data |
A data frame containing the data for the corresponding
|
Details
Details on single logicDT models can be found in logicDT
.
Value
An object of class logic.boosted
. This is a list
containing
models |
A list of fitted |
rho |
A vector of boosting coefficient corresponding to each model |
initialModel |
Initial model which is usually the observed mean |
... |
Supplied parameters of the functional call
to |
References
Lau, M., Schikowski, T. & Schwender, H. (2024). logicDT: A procedure for identifying response-associated interactions between binary predictors. Machine Learning 113(2):933–992. doi: 10.1007/s10994-023-06488-6
Friedman, J. H. (2001). Greedy Function Approximation: A Gradient Boosting Machine. The Annals of Statistics, 29(5), 1189–1232. doi: 10.1214/aos/1013203451