1 | Data set has 452 vectors with 279 features. |
---|
2 | Sampled 452 points out of 452 |
---|
3 | calculateLambdaMax: n=279, m=452, m+=245, m-=207 |
---|
4 | computed value of lambda_max: 1.8231e+02 |
---|
5 | |
---|
6 | **** Initial point: nz=0, f= 0.69314718056, lambda= 1.641e+02 |
---|
7 | iter 1, gpnorm=4.2035e-02, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.931471805599e-01, alpha=1.0000e+00 |
---|
8 | iter 2, gpnorm=1.9781e-02, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.903943411116e-01, alpha=8.0000e-01 |
---|
9 | iter 3, gpnorm=6.0325e-03, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896822613633e-01, alpha=6.4000e-01 |
---|
10 | iter 4, gpnorm=7.2193e-04, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896101060279e-01, alpha=5.1200e-01 |
---|
11 | iter 5, gpnorm=1.0530e-05, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090566277e-01, alpha=4.0960e-01 |
---|
12 | iter 6, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01 |
---|
13 | Function evals = 12, Gradient evals = 6.0 |
---|
14 | |
---|
15 | **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 1.168e+02 |
---|
16 | iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01 |
---|
17 | Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0 |
---|
18 | |
---|
19 | **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 8.310e+01 |
---|
20 | iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01 |
---|
21 | Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0 |
---|
22 | |
---|
23 | **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 5.914e+01 |
---|
24 | iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01 |
---|
25 | Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0 |
---|
26 | |
---|
27 | **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 4.209e+01 |
---|
28 | iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01 |
---|
29 | Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0 |
---|
30 | |
---|
31 | **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 2.996e+01 |
---|
32 | iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01 |
---|
33 | Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0 |
---|
34 | |
---|
35 | **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 2.132e+01 |
---|
36 | iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01 |
---|
37 | Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0 |
---|
38 | |
---|
39 | **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 1.517e+01 |
---|
40 | iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01 |
---|
41 | Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0 |
---|
42 | |
---|
43 | **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 1.080e+01 |
---|
44 | iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01 |
---|
45 | Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0 |
---|
46 | |
---|
47 | **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 7.685e+00 |
---|
48 | iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01 |
---|
49 | Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0 |
---|
50 | |
---|
51 | **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 5.469e+00 |
---|
52 | iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01 |
---|
53 | Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0 |
---|
54 | |
---|
55 | lambda=1.64e+02 solution: |
---|
56 | optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
57 | optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
58 | number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1 |
---|
59 | number of iterations required: 6 |
---|
60 | prediction using this solution: |
---|
61 | 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted. |
---|
62 | 245 correctly predicted. |
---|
63 | 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1. |
---|
64 | 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1. |
---|
65 | 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
66 | 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
67 | |
---|
68 | lambda=1.17e+02 solution: |
---|
69 | optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
70 | optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
71 | number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1 |
---|
72 | number of iterations required: 1 |
---|
73 | prediction using this solution: |
---|
74 | 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted. |
---|
75 | 245 correctly predicted. |
---|
76 | 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1. |
---|
77 | 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1. |
---|
78 | 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
79 | 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
80 | |
---|
81 | lambda=8.31e+01 solution: |
---|
82 | optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
83 | optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
84 | number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1 |
---|
85 | number of iterations required: 1 |
---|
86 | prediction using this solution: |
---|
87 | 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted. |
---|
88 | 245 correctly predicted. |
---|
89 | 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1. |
---|
90 | 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1. |
---|
91 | 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
92 | 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
93 | |
---|
94 | lambda=5.91e+01 solution: |
---|
95 | optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
96 | optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
97 | number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1 |
---|
98 | number of iterations required: 1 |
---|
99 | prediction using this solution: |
---|
100 | 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted. |
---|
101 | 245 correctly predicted. |
---|
102 | 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1. |
---|
103 | 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1. |
---|
104 | 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
105 | 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
106 | |
---|
107 | lambda=4.21e+01 solution: |
---|
108 | optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
109 | optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
110 | number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1 |
---|
111 | number of iterations required: 1 |
---|
112 | prediction using this solution: |
---|
113 | 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted. |
---|
114 | 245 correctly predicted. |
---|
115 | 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1. |
---|
116 | 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1. |
---|
117 | 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
118 | 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
119 | |
---|
120 | lambda=3.00e+01 solution: |
---|
121 | optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
122 | optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
123 | number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1 |
---|
124 | number of iterations required: 1 |
---|
125 | prediction using this solution: |
---|
126 | 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted. |
---|
127 | 245 correctly predicted. |
---|
128 | 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1. |
---|
129 | 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1. |
---|
130 | 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
131 | 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
132 | |
---|
133 | lambda=2.13e+01 solution: |
---|
134 | optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
135 | optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
136 | number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1 |
---|
137 | number of iterations required: 1 |
---|
138 | prediction using this solution: |
---|
139 | 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted. |
---|
140 | 245 correctly predicted. |
---|
141 | 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1. |
---|
142 | 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1. |
---|
143 | 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
144 | 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
145 | |
---|
146 | lambda=1.52e+01 solution: |
---|
147 | optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
148 | optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
149 | number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1 |
---|
150 | number of iterations required: 1 |
---|
151 | prediction using this solution: |
---|
152 | 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted. |
---|
153 | 245 correctly predicted. |
---|
154 | 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1. |
---|
155 | 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1. |
---|
156 | 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
157 | 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
158 | |
---|
159 | lambda=1.08e+01 solution: |
---|
160 | optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
161 | optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
162 | number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1 |
---|
163 | number of iterations required: 1 |
---|
164 | prediction using this solution: |
---|
165 | 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted. |
---|
166 | 245 correctly predicted. |
---|
167 | 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1. |
---|
168 | 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1. |
---|
169 | 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
170 | 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
171 | |
---|
172 | lambda=7.68e+00 solution: |
---|
173 | optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
174 | optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
175 | number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1 |
---|
176 | number of iterations required: 1 |
---|
177 | prediction using this solution: |
---|
178 | 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted. |
---|
179 | 245 correctly predicted. |
---|
180 | 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1. |
---|
181 | 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1. |
---|
182 | 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
183 | 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
184 | |
---|
185 | lambda=5.47e+00 solution: |
---|
186 | optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
187 | optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01 |
---|
188 | number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1 |
---|
189 | number of iterations required: 1 |
---|
190 | prediction using this solution: |
---|
191 | 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted. |
---|
192 | 245 correctly predicted. |
---|
193 | 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1. |
---|
194 | 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1. |
---|
195 | 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
196 | 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance. |
---|
197 | |
---|