Just some trivia for your entertainment.
The difference between the top spots is 0.000005 (yes 5e-6!) at the moment. Given the size of the test set and the ~20% that is used for public (so public scores ~76,000 observations) it means that there is (probably) just a single difference between the 20% public observations between the top spots!
Talk about small margins ... 1 / 76,000 ...Rassie would be proud ...
Code to simulate this with fwiw
import numpy as np
from sklearn.metrics import f1_score
# Configure
n = 76000
f11 = 0.699872184
f12 = 0.699867441
# Simulate
rng = np.random.default_rng ( 41 )
act = rng.integers ( 2, size = n )
prd = act.copy ()
i = 35000
prd [ : i ] = 0
while f1_score ( act, prd ) > f11 :
prd [ i ] = 0
i += 1
print ( f"Changed { i } values for { f1_score ( act, prd ) } want { f11 }" )
k = 0
j = i
while f1_score ( act, prd ) > f12 :
if prd [ j ] :
k += 1
prd [ j ] = 0
j += 1
print ( f"Changed { j } values for { f1_score ( act, prd ) } want { f12 } { k } real changes" )
print ( f"Difference is {f11 - f12:.9f}" )
@wuuthraad this clearly shows I'm an "applied" mathematician. If I was a real one I'd derive it with first principles ...
My money is on everyone's CV scores, Did you cross-validate @skaak. I was just optimizing my recall and precision scores individually which just helps me understand where the model might be going stray. Like I mentioned in an earlier post Fe has been surprisingly helpful. In all honesty my model is fairly staright forward... it's "simple" for the lack of a better word. I am just balancing the Bias-Variance tradeoff, you know. Keeping the model as simple as possible but also as predictive as possible. that is why I am going towards FE , CV then modelling( RedBulll Too).
won't be surprised if there's a shake-up in the LB, these scores are cutting it close, nobody seems to be breaking the .70 wall(yet)
One point is all you need or in case a fraction of a point
Yeah, have emptied my bench (as @adamjcordy also did) and managed to join the 0.6999 club (with sub 99 fwiw) ... few hours more and will see if it is overfit or elegance.
@skaak so you did breach the .70 wall. I weirdly enough submitted one final csv after adding a few new features and It outperformed all my previous subs. that was around 1:58 AM. I had a feeling it was going to do good but the moment I selected it to be part of my evaluation subs an error message showed up. hahahaha ironic isn't it BTW the score I got at the 11th hour was (private LB : 0.699455367) ChurchHill would be proud. congrats on beating me on the LB yet again! hahahaha
And in true Bokke fashion you won it by one point!
Tx @wuuthraad and also congrats. Pity you could not select that final sub - that would take you from 10 to 7? Not long ago I had similar trouble - repeatedly ran into an error in the final hour ... you must talk to Amy, perhaps she can do something for you.
Often when I post or submit, I get an error, and when I reload it just goes away. Over here I also did some last minute changes and was wondering if I am not making a huge mistake, but this time at least it worked and I got the bit of LB lift I needed. fwiw I consistently had lower CV than LB and I see most private LB is also higher than public.
Wow what a comp ... I'll set up a chat, just a kind of review and open discussion around this. @MakalaMabotja also asked for something like that, but I'll post some invite here, perhaps with a bit of a review of my approach, and then we discuss, especially if you can also describe your approach a bit.
Congrats @Sivuyile_Nzimeni you got a nice lift on the LB wow.