Skip to main content
Data Science

Return to Question

edited title
Link
Brian Spiering
Brian Spiering
  • 23.9k
  • 2
  • 30
  • 120

Does it make sense to randomly select features as a baseline?

style corrections
Source Link
Juan Esteban de la Calle
Juan Esteban de la Calle
  • 2.3k
  • 9
  • 28

In my paper, I am saying that the accuracy of classification is X%$x\%$ when using the top N features.

My supervisor thinks that we should capture the classification accuracy when using N randomly selected features to show that the initial feature selection technique makes an actual difference.

Does this make sense?

I've argued that no one cares about randomly selected features so this addition doesn't make sense. It's quite obvious that randomly selecting features will provide a worse classification accuracy so there's no need to show that using any sort of feature ranking metric will be superior.

In my paper, I am saying that the accuracy of classification is X% when using the top N features.

My supervisor thinks that we should capture the classification accuracy when using N randomly selected features to show that the initial feature selection technique makes an actual difference.

Does this make sense?

I've argued that no one cares about randomly selected features so this addition doesn't make sense. It's quite obvious that randomly selecting features will provide a worse classification accuracy so there's no need to show that using any sort of feature ranking metric will be superior.

In my paper, I am saying that the accuracy of classification is $x\%$ when using the top N features.

My supervisor thinks that we should capture the classification accuracy when using N randomly selected features to show that the initial feature selection technique makes an actual difference.

Does this make sense?

I've argued that no one cares about randomly selected features so this addition doesn't make sense. It's quite obvious that randomly selecting features will provide a worse classification accuracy so there's no need to show that using any sort of feature ranking metric will be superior.

Source Link
Sterls
Sterls
  • 160
  • 1
  • 7

Does it make sense to randomly select features?

In my paper, I am saying that the accuracy of classification is X% when using the top N features.

My supervisor thinks that we should capture the classification accuracy when using N randomly selected features to show that the initial feature selection technique makes an actual difference.

Does this make sense?

I've argued that no one cares about randomly selected features so this addition doesn't make sense. It's quite obvious that randomly selecting features will provide a worse classification accuracy so there's no need to show that using any sort of feature ranking metric will be superior.