Skip to content

FIX Draw indices using sample_weight in Forest #31529

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 16 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

antoinebaker
Copy link
Contributor

@antoinebaker antoinebaker commented Jun 12, 2025

Part of #16298. Similar to #31414 (Bagging estimators) but for Forest estimators.

What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.

When subsampling is activated (bootstrap=True), sample_weight are now used as probabilities to draw the indices. Forest estimators then pass the statistical repeated/weighted equivalence test.

Comments

This PR does not fix Forest estimators when bootstrap=False (no subsampling). sample_weight are still passed to the decision trees. Forest estimators then fail the statistical repeated/weighted equivalence test because the individual trees
also fail this test (probably because of tied splits in decision trees #23728).

TODO

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 12, 2025

✔️ Linting Passed

All linting checks passed. Your pull request is in excellent shape! ☀️

Generated for commit: bff60ae. Link to the linter CI: here

@antoinebaker
Copy link
Contributor Author

The forest estimators now pass the statistical repeated/weighted equivalence test, for example
image

@antoinebaker
Copy link
Contributor Author

Relative (float) max_samples, with the new meaning of drawing max_samples * sw_sum indices as done in #31414 , also passes the statistical repeated/weighted equivalence test
image

@antoinebaker
Copy link
Contributor Author

The class_weight="balanced" option, now taking the sample_weight into account as in #30057, now passes the statistical repeated/weighted equivalence test
image

@antoinebaker
Copy link
Contributor Author

The class_weight="balanced_subsampling" also passes, in that case sample_weight are used to draw the indices, the class_weight are then computed on the bootstraped sample for every grown tree and passed as sample_weight to the tree fit.
image

Comment on lines +146 to +147
if sample_weight is None:
sample_indices = random_instance.randint(0, n_samples, n_samples_bootstrap)
Copy link
Contributor Author

@antoinebaker antoinebaker Jun 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There two options for the random draw of indices when sample_weight=None

  1. Convert to all ones
    if sample_weight is None:
        sample_weight = np.ones(n_samples)
    normalized_sample_weight = sample_weight / np.sum(sample_weight)
    sample_indices = random_instance.choice(
        n_samples, n_samples_bootstrap, replace=True, p=normalized_sample_weight
    )
  1. Use the old code path when sample_weight=None
    if sample_weight is None:
        sample_indices = random_instance.randint(0, n_samples, n_samples_bootstrap)
    else:
        normalized_sample_weight = sample_weight / np.sum(sample_weight)
        sample_indices = random_instance.choice(
            n_samples,
            n_samples_bootstrap,
            replace=True,
            p=normalized_sample_weight,
        )

The two options use different rng functions: choice with uniform p for 1 and randint for 2. They are statistically the same but they don't give the same deterministic output for a given random state.

The benefit of 2. is that the code is backward compatible when sample_weight=None. A fit without sample_weight reproduce the same fit as main for a given random_state.

The benefit of 1. is that sample_weight=None and sample_weight=np.ones(n_samples) give the same fit for a given random_state.

Here we chose 2.

@antoinebaker antoinebaker marked this pull request as ready for review June 27, 2025 10:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant