News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Random Forest vs. Neural Network by dlphn___xyz on Monday June 03, 2019 @12:11PM (#20084787)
this approach is also very inefficient- autoML takes hours searching for parameters when you could build the same model manually in a fraction of the time.
Re:Random Forest vs. Neural Network by minimaxir on Monday June 03, 2019 @12:17PM (#20084876)
There's no reason you can't do both: prototype a simple model to get a baseline performance, then use AutoML to fine-tune it, plus you now have a value to sanity check against.

Those hours of hyperparameter search aren't blocking. You can do other things while it's searching, or do the search when not actively using the resources (e.g. overnight).

Re:Random Forest vs. Neural Network by pplonski86 on Monday June 03, 2019 @12:15PM (#20084845)
It depends on what algorithms you use in AutoML. If you decide to use simple algorithms: logistic regression, decision tree, random forest then you will have a simple model very quickly. Using Neural Networks in AutoML requires much more computational resources.
Re:Random Forest vs. Neural Network by riku_iki on Monday June 03, 2019 @03:39PM (#20087515)
if you know optimal hyperparameters from the beginning, then yes, you can build such model manually. But in most cases this is not the case.