Re: [R] mboost vs gbm

The default shrinkage (learning rate) for mboost is much higher than for gbm. -- View this message in context: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/mboost-vs-gbm-tp4637518p4654637.html Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com. __ R-help@r-pro

[R] mboost vs gbm

I'm attempting to fit boosted regression trees to a censored response using IPCW weighting. I've implemented this through two libraries, mboost and gbm, which I believe should yield models that would perform comparably. This, however, is not the case - mboost performs much better. This seems odd