[Gretl-devel] Re: Current state with distance()
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021, Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021, Artur T. wrote:
> Am 30.10.21 um 11:58 schrieb Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti:
>> On Sat, 30 Oct 2021, Artur T. wrote:
>>
>>>> But in fact I think that when argument 3 is non-null, having a matrix as
>>>> output is preferable aafter all. If we all agree, I can take care of
>>>> this later today.
>>>
>>> I think that's useful.
>>
>> OK, it's now in git. I also updated the doc file and, while I was at it, I
>> documented the new features in vech() and unvech().
>
> Hi Jack,
>
> the dimensions are still different to what sklearn returns.
Well, it wasn't my intention to clone sklearn. Are you sure it's not just the
transpose?
It is just the transpose, but do we really want to make the return
value in the X,Y case a matrix rather than a vector?
I'm not sure that's very helpful, but if we stay with a matrix
result I think Artur is right: in a matrix operation where the
left-hand operand is m x n and the right-hand one is p x n it seems
unintuitive to give a p x m result; seems m x p would be better.
(That point is of course invisible if m == p but it appears
otherwise.)
Allin