xgboost feature importance of categorical variable
I am using XGBClassifier to train in python and there are a handful of categorical variables in my training dataset. Originally, I planed to convert each of them into a few dummies before I throw in my data, but then the feature importance will be calculated for each dummy, not the original categorical ones. Since I also need to order all of my original variables (including numerical + categorical) by importance, I am wondering how to get importance of my original variables? Is it simply adding up?
python xgboost categorical-data
add a comment |
I am using XGBClassifier to train in python and there are a handful of categorical variables in my training dataset. Originally, I planed to convert each of them into a few dummies before I throw in my data, but then the feature importance will be calculated for each dummy, not the original categorical ones. Since I also need to order all of my original variables (including numerical + categorical) by importance, I am wondering how to get importance of my original variables? Is it simply adding up?
python xgboost categorical-data
add a comment |
I am using XGBClassifier to train in python and there are a handful of categorical variables in my training dataset. Originally, I planed to convert each of them into a few dummies before I throw in my data, but then the feature importance will be calculated for each dummy, not the original categorical ones. Since I also need to order all of my original variables (including numerical + categorical) by importance, I am wondering how to get importance of my original variables? Is it simply adding up?
python xgboost categorical-data
I am using XGBClassifier to train in python and there are a handful of categorical variables in my training dataset. Originally, I planed to convert each of them into a few dummies before I throw in my data, but then the feature importance will be calculated for each dummy, not the original categorical ones. Since I also need to order all of my original variables (including numerical + categorical) by importance, I am wondering how to get importance of my original variables? Is it simply adding up?
python xgboost categorical-data
python xgboost categorical-data
asked Nov 15 '18 at 20:21
![](https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-fihNehTTIy0/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAABs/923DB_2TpcU/photo.jpg?sz=32)
![](https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-fihNehTTIy0/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAABs/923DB_2TpcU/photo.jpg?sz=32)
pingboingpingboing
84
84
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
You could probably get by with summing the individual categories' importances into their original, parent category. But, unless these features are high-cardinality, my two cents would be to report them individually. I tend to err on the side of being more explicit with reporting model performance/importance measures.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53327334%2fxgboost-feature-importance-of-categorical-variable%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You could probably get by with summing the individual categories' importances into their original, parent category. But, unless these features are high-cardinality, my two cents would be to report them individually. I tend to err on the side of being more explicit with reporting model performance/importance measures.
add a comment |
You could probably get by with summing the individual categories' importances into their original, parent category. But, unless these features are high-cardinality, my two cents would be to report them individually. I tend to err on the side of being more explicit with reporting model performance/importance measures.
add a comment |
You could probably get by with summing the individual categories' importances into their original, parent category. But, unless these features are high-cardinality, my two cents would be to report them individually. I tend to err on the side of being more explicit with reporting model performance/importance measures.
You could probably get by with summing the individual categories' importances into their original, parent category. But, unless these features are high-cardinality, my two cents would be to report them individually. I tend to err on the side of being more explicit with reporting model performance/importance measures.
answered Nov 15 '18 at 20:24
![](https://i.stack.imgur.com/FC40Y.jpg?s=32&g=1)
![](https://i.stack.imgur.com/FC40Y.jpg?s=32&g=1)
blacksiteblacksite
5,64241747
5,64241747
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53327334%2fxgboost-feature-importance-of-categorical-variable%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown