3 ms·
Maybe we're talking about different algorithms. Do you agree that we are talking about random search as outlined in this Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.or
by natanielruiz 7y ago
Maybe we're talking about different algorithms. Do you agree that we are talking about random search as outlined in this Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_search https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_search)?
- lalaland1125 7y agoAh, that makes sense. By random search, I thought you were referring to random search as defined in http://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume13/bergstra12a/bergstra12a.pdf http://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume13/bergstra12a/bergstra12a..... I believe that's the more common method for hyperparameter optimization cases like this (https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/en//pubs/archive/46180.pdf https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.c..., https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/generated/sklearn.model_selection.RandomizedSearchCV.html https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/generated/sklearn.mo...). It has much better guarantees than the method you used and tends to work quite well in practice. It's also probably what the reviewers meant by a random search baseline.
- natanielruiz 7y agoOur "random parameters" baseline is actually the random search that you refer to, while the "random search" that we use, is the actual derivative-free optimization technique of random search. Reviewers asked for a comparison with this specific random search. You can go look at the reviews on OpenReview.
- natanielruiz 7y agoI’m also confused when you say that it has better guarantees. Which guarantees?