You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@opennlp.apache.org by "Richard Head Jr." <hs...@yahoo.com.INVALID> on 2015/02/16 19:10:00 UTC
TokenNameFinderEvaluator Outputting No Stats
I ran the command line evaluator several times on tokenized/untokenized and large/small input but get no results (see below). The model appears to be finding tokens quite well, I'd just like to evaluate *how* well:
opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -data some-data.txt -model a-model.bin
Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.111s)
Average: 104.2 sent/s
Total: 15 sent
Runtime: 0.144s
Precision: 0.0
Recall: 0.0
F-Measure: -1.0
Now on a larger set of data:
opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -encoding latin1 -data /tmp/db-raw.txt -model a-model.bin
Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.156s)
current: 364.9 sent/s avg: 364.9 sent/s total: 366 sent
current: 427.4 sent/s avg: 396.1 sent/s total: 793 sent
Average: 477.7 sent/s
Total: 1434 sent
Runtime: 3.002s
Precision: 0.0
Recall: 0.0
F-Measure: -1.0
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks
Re: TokenNameFinderEvaluator Outputting No Stats
Posted by Joern Kottmann <ko...@gmail.com>.
The numbers should probably slightly lower. It depends a bit on the data
you are processing.
I know of two ways to get very high performance numbers in that range:
- Use very little data which gets tagged perfectly by the model.
- Run the model over the training data.
HTH,
Jörn
On Sat, 2015-02-28 at 02:34 +0000, Richard Head Jr. wrote:
> > Add -misclassified true
> Very handy
> > To evaluate you need a annotated corpus...
> This was my problem.
> No that I can run it I see measurements of 0.99XXXXX, but I noticed that the better models -as determined by my separate unit tests, which check what was actually classified- have lower measurements.
> According to my test cases this is a very good model:
> Precision: 0.9905921169966114Recall: 0.9946277476832162F-Measure: 0.9926058304478945
> While this one is not so great:
> Precision: 0.9951354487436962Recall: 0.9982540179970453F-Measure: 0.9966922939388522
> Am I missing something here?
> Thanks
> On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 11:48 PM, William Colen <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Add
> -misclassified trueto the command to output what was misclassified.But I have a guess. To evaluate you need a annotated corpus. Is the file /tmp/db-raw.txt annotated? It should look like this:<START:person> Pierre Vinken <END> , 61 years old , will join the board as a nonexecutive director Nov. 29 .
> Mr . <START:person> Vinken <END> is chairman of Elsevier N.V. , the Dutch publishing group .
> <START:person> Rudolph Agnew <END> , 55 years old and former chairman of Consolidated Gold Fields PLC ,
> was named a director of this British industrial conglomerate .
> Regards,William2015-02-26 1:24 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr. <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid>:
>
> > Are you using 1.5.3?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Can you send a small sample?
> I can't send the model. Any other options? What format is the file given to the -data option supposed to be in?
> Thanks
> On Friday, February 20, 2015 2:14 PM, William Colen <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Are you using 1.5.3? Can you send a small sample?
>
> Em segunda-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2015, Richard Head Jr. <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid> escreveu:
>
> I ran the command line evaluator several times on tokenized/untokenized and large/small input but get no results (see below). The model appears to be finding tokens quite well, I'd just like to evaluate *how* well:
>
> opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -data some-data.txt -model a-model.bin
> Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.111s)
>
>
> Average: 104.2 sent/s
> Total: 15 sent
> Runtime: 0.144s
>
> Precision: 0.0
> Recall: 0.0
> F-Measure: -1.0
>
> Now on a larger set of data:
>
> opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -encoding latin1 -data /tmp/db-raw.txt -model a-model.bin
> Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.156s)
> current: 364.9 sent/s avg: 364.9 sent/s total: 366 sent
> current: 427.4 sent/s avg: 396.1 sent/s total: 793 sent
>
>
> Average: 477.7 sent/s
> Total: 1434 sent
> Runtime: 3.002s
>
> Precision: 0.0
> Recall: 0.0
> F-Measure: -1.0
>
>
>
> What am I doing wrong?
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> --
> William Colen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: TokenNameFinderEvaluator Outputting No Stats
Posted by William Colen <wi...@gmail.com>.
Yes, it is. With NLP we need to deal with the low precision/recall. You
could add more examples related to the misclassified tokens, but it is not
easy. There is a number of issues you would face, such as overfitting.
For a NER model I would not expect something better than 85% for F1, and
you are getting 99%!
2015-03-15 18:12 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr. <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid>:
> > Could you restate your question? I could not understand what you want.
> I was wondering why the precision/recall/f-measure values output
> by TokenNameFinderEvaluatorwere higher for models that performed worse. By
> "worse" I mean they miss tokens that the other, lower performing (according
> to TokenNameFinderEvaluator) models, don't.
> > Actually, your models are performing too good for a NER.
> Well, they still misclassify tokens. Should I be using something else or
> is this just the reality of NER?
> Thanks.
> On Monday, March 2, 2015 8:44 AM, William Colen <
> william.colen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Could you restate your question? I could not understand what you want.
> Actually, your models are performing too good for a NER.
>
>
> 2015-02-27 23:34 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr. <hsomob1999@yahoo.com.invalid
> >:
>
> > > Add -misclassified true
> > Very handy
> > > To evaluate you need a annotated corpus...
> > This was my problem.
> > No that I can run it I see measurements of 0.99XXXXX, but I noticed that
> > the better models -as determined by my separate unit tests, which check
> > what was actually classified- have lower measurements.
> > According to my test cases this is a very good model:
> > Precision: 0.9905921169966114Recall: 0.9946277476832162F-Measure:
> > 0.9926058304478945
> > While this one is not so great:
> > Precision: 0.9951354487436962Recall: 0.9982540179970453F-Measure:
> > 0.9966922939388522
> > Am I missing something here?
> > Thanks
> > On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 11:48 PM, William Colen <
> > william.colen@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Add
> > -misclassified trueto the command to output what was misclassified.But I
> > have a guess. To evaluate you need a annotated corpus. Is the
> > file /tmp/db-raw.txt annotated? It should look like this:<START:person>
> > Pierre Vinken <END> , 61 years old , will join the board as a
> nonexecutive
> > director Nov. 29 .
> > Mr . <START:person> Vinken <END> is chairman of Elsevier N.V. , the Dutch
> > publishing group .
> > <START:person> Rudolph Agnew <END> , 55 years old and former chairman of
> > Consolidated Gold Fields PLC ,
> > was named a director of this British industrial conglomerate .
> > Regards,William2015-02-26 1:24 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr.
> > <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid>:
> >
> > > Are you using 1.5.3?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > > Can you send a small sample?
> > I can't send the model. Any other options? What format is the file given
> > to the -data option supposed to be in?
> > Thanks
> > On Friday, February 20, 2015 2:14 PM, William Colen <
> > william.colen@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Are you using 1.5.3? Can you send a small sample?
> >
> > Em segunda-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2015, Richard Head Jr.
> > <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid> escreveu:
> >
> > I ran the command line evaluator several times on tokenized/untokenized
> > and large/small input but get no results (see below). The model appears
> to
> > be finding tokens quite well, I'd just like to evaluate *how* well:
> >
> > opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -data some-data.txt -model a-model.bin
> > Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.111s)
> >
> >
> > Average: 104.2 sent/s
> > Total: 15 sent
> > Runtime: 0.144s
> >
> > Precision: 0.0
> > Recall: 0.0
> > F-Measure: -1.0
> >
> > Now on a larger set of data:
> >
> > opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -encoding latin1 -data /tmp/db-raw.txt
> > -model a-model.bin
> > Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.156s)
> > current: 364.9 sent/s avg: 364.9 sent/s total: 366 sent
> > current: 427.4 sent/s avg: 396.1 sent/s total: 793 sent
> >
> >
> > Average: 477.7 sent/s
> > Total: 1434 sent
> > Runtime: 3.002s
> >
> > Precision: 0.0
> > Recall: 0.0
> > F-Measure: -1.0
> >
> >
> >
> > What am I doing wrong?
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > William Colen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Re: TokenNameFinderEvaluator Outputting No Stats
Posted by "Richard Head Jr." <hs...@yahoo.com.INVALID>.
> Could you restate your question? I could not understand what you want.
I was wondering why the precision/recall/f-measure values output by TokenNameFinderEvaluatorwere higher for models that performed worse. By "worse" I mean they miss tokens that the other, lower performing (according to TokenNameFinderEvaluator) models, don't.
> Actually, your models are performing too good for a NER.
Well, they still misclassify tokens. Should I be using something else or is this just the reality of NER?
Thanks.
On Monday, March 2, 2015 8:44 AM, William Colen <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
Could you restate your question? I could not understand what you want.
Actually, your models are performing too good for a NER.
2015-02-27 23:34 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr. <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid>:
> > Add -misclassified true
> Very handy
> > To evaluate you need a annotated corpus...
> This was my problem.
> No that I can run it I see measurements of 0.99XXXXX, but I noticed that
> the better models -as determined by my separate unit tests, which check
> what was actually classified- have lower measurements.
> According to my test cases this is a very good model:
> Precision: 0.9905921169966114Recall: 0.9946277476832162F-Measure:
> 0.9926058304478945
> While this one is not so great:
> Precision: 0.9951354487436962Recall: 0.9982540179970453F-Measure:
> 0.9966922939388522
> Am I missing something here?
> Thanks
> On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 11:48 PM, William Colen <
> william.colen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Add
> -misclassified trueto the command to output what was misclassified.But I
> have a guess. To evaluate you need a annotated corpus. Is the
> file /tmp/db-raw.txt annotated? It should look like this:<START:person>
> Pierre Vinken <END> , 61 years old , will join the board as a nonexecutive
> director Nov. 29 .
> Mr . <START:person> Vinken <END> is chairman of Elsevier N.V. , the Dutch
> publishing group .
> <START:person> Rudolph Agnew <END> , 55 years old and former chairman of
> Consolidated Gold Fields PLC ,
> was named a director of this British industrial conglomerate .
> Regards,William2015-02-26 1:24 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr.
> <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid>:
>
> > Are you using 1.5.3?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Can you send a small sample?
> I can't send the model. Any other options? What format is the file given
> to the -data option supposed to be in?
> Thanks
> On Friday, February 20, 2015 2:14 PM, William Colen <
> william.colen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Are you using 1.5.3? Can you send a small sample?
>
> Em segunda-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2015, Richard Head Jr.
> <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid> escreveu:
>
> I ran the command line evaluator several times on tokenized/untokenized
> and large/small input but get no results (see below). The model appears to
> be finding tokens quite well, I'd just like to evaluate *how* well:
>
> opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -data some-data.txt -model a-model.bin
> Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.111s)
>
>
> Average: 104.2 sent/s
> Total: 15 sent
> Runtime: 0.144s
>
> Precision: 0.0
> Recall: 0.0
> F-Measure: -1.0
>
> Now on a larger set of data:
>
> opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -encoding latin1 -data /tmp/db-raw.txt
> -model a-model.bin
> Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.156s)
> current: 364.9 sent/s avg: 364.9 sent/s total: 366 sent
> current: 427.4 sent/s avg: 396.1 sent/s total: 793 sent
>
>
> Average: 477.7 sent/s
> Total: 1434 sent
> Runtime: 3.002s
>
> Precision: 0.0
> Recall: 0.0
> F-Measure: -1.0
>
>
>
> What am I doing wrong?
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> --
> William Colen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: TokenNameFinderEvaluator Outputting No Stats
Posted by William Colen <wi...@gmail.com>.
Could you restate your question? I could not understand what you want.
Actually, your models are performing too good for a NER.
2015-02-27 23:34 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr. <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid>:
> > Add -misclassified true
> Very handy
> > To evaluate you need a annotated corpus...
> This was my problem.
> No that I can run it I see measurements of 0.99XXXXX, but I noticed that
> the better models -as determined by my separate unit tests, which check
> what was actually classified- have lower measurements.
> According to my test cases this is a very good model:
> Precision: 0.9905921169966114Recall: 0.9946277476832162F-Measure:
> 0.9926058304478945
> While this one is not so great:
> Precision: 0.9951354487436962Recall: 0.9982540179970453F-Measure:
> 0.9966922939388522
> Am I missing something here?
> Thanks
> On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 11:48 PM, William Colen <
> william.colen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Add
> -misclassified trueto the command to output what was misclassified.But I
> have a guess. To evaluate you need a annotated corpus. Is the
> file /tmp/db-raw.txt annotated? It should look like this:<START:person>
> Pierre Vinken <END> , 61 years old , will join the board as a nonexecutive
> director Nov. 29 .
> Mr . <START:person> Vinken <END> is chairman of Elsevier N.V. , the Dutch
> publishing group .
> <START:person> Rudolph Agnew <END> , 55 years old and former chairman of
> Consolidated Gold Fields PLC ,
> was named a director of this British industrial conglomerate .
> Regards,William2015-02-26 1:24 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr.
> <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid>:
>
> > Are you using 1.5.3?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Can you send a small sample?
> I can't send the model. Any other options? What format is the file given
> to the -data option supposed to be in?
> Thanks
> On Friday, February 20, 2015 2:14 PM, William Colen <
> william.colen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Are you using 1.5.3? Can you send a small sample?
>
> Em segunda-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2015, Richard Head Jr.
> <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid> escreveu:
>
> I ran the command line evaluator several times on tokenized/untokenized
> and large/small input but get no results (see below). The model appears to
> be finding tokens quite well, I'd just like to evaluate *how* well:
>
> opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -data some-data.txt -model a-model.bin
> Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.111s)
>
>
> Average: 104.2 sent/s
> Total: 15 sent
> Runtime: 0.144s
>
> Precision: 0.0
> Recall: 0.0
> F-Measure: -1.0
>
> Now on a larger set of data:
>
> opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -encoding latin1 -data /tmp/db-raw.txt
> -model a-model.bin
> Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.156s)
> current: 364.9 sent/s avg: 364.9 sent/s total: 366 sent
> current: 427.4 sent/s avg: 396.1 sent/s total: 793 sent
>
>
> Average: 477.7 sent/s
> Total: 1434 sent
> Runtime: 3.002s
>
> Precision: 0.0
> Recall: 0.0
> F-Measure: -1.0
>
>
>
> What am I doing wrong?
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> --
> William Colen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: TokenNameFinderEvaluator Outputting No Stats
Posted by "Richard Head Jr." <hs...@yahoo.com.INVALID>.
> Add -misclassified true
Very handy
> To evaluate you need a annotated corpus...
This was my problem.
No that I can run it I see measurements of 0.99XXXXX, but I noticed that the better models -as determined by my separate unit tests, which check what was actually classified- have lower measurements.
According to my test cases this is a very good model:
Precision: 0.9905921169966114Recall: 0.9946277476832162F-Measure: 0.9926058304478945
While this one is not so great:
Precision: 0.9951354487436962Recall: 0.9982540179970453F-Measure: 0.9966922939388522
Am I missing something here?
Thanks
On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 11:48 PM, William Colen <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
Add
-misclassified trueto the command to output what was misclassified.But I have a guess. To evaluate you need a annotated corpus. Is the file /tmp/db-raw.txt annotated? It should look like this:<START:person> Pierre Vinken <END> , 61 years old , will join the board as a nonexecutive director Nov. 29 .
Mr . <START:person> Vinken <END> is chairman of Elsevier N.V. , the Dutch publishing group .
<START:person> Rudolph Agnew <END> , 55 years old and former chairman of Consolidated Gold Fields PLC ,
was named a director of this British industrial conglomerate .
Regards,William2015-02-26 1:24 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr. <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid>:
> Are you using 1.5.3?
Yes.
> Can you send a small sample?
I can't send the model. Any other options? What format is the file given to the -data option supposed to be in?
Thanks
On Friday, February 20, 2015 2:14 PM, William Colen <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
Are you using 1.5.3? Can you send a small sample?
Em segunda-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2015, Richard Head Jr. <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid> escreveu:
I ran the command line evaluator several times on tokenized/untokenized and large/small input but get no results (see below). The model appears to be finding tokens quite well, I'd just like to evaluate *how* well:
opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -data some-data.txt -model a-model.bin
Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.111s)
Average: 104.2 sent/s
Total: 15 sent
Runtime: 0.144s
Precision: 0.0
Recall: 0.0
F-Measure: -1.0
Now on a larger set of data:
opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -encoding latin1 -data /tmp/db-raw.txt -model a-model.bin
Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.156s)
current: 364.9 sent/s avg: 364.9 sent/s total: 366 sent
current: 427.4 sent/s avg: 396.1 sent/s total: 793 sent
Average: 477.7 sent/s
Total: 1434 sent
Runtime: 3.002s
Precision: 0.0
Recall: 0.0
F-Measure: -1.0
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks
--
William Colen
Re: TokenNameFinderEvaluator Outputting No Stats
Posted by William Colen <wi...@gmail.com>.
Add
-misclassified true
to the command to output what was misclassified.
But I have a guess. To evaluate you need a annotated corpus. Is the
file /tmp/db-raw.txt annotated? It should look like this:
<START:person> Pierre Vinken <END> , 61 years old , will join the
board as a nonexecutive director Nov. 29 .
Mr . <START:person> Vinken <END> is chairman of Elsevier N.V. , the
Dutch publishing group .
<START:person> Rudolph Agnew <END> , 55 years old and former chairman
of Consolidated Gold Fields PLC ,
was named a director of this British industrial conglomerate .
Regards,
William
2015-02-26 1:24 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr. <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid>:
> > Are you using 1.5.3?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Can you send a small sample?
> I can't send the model. Any other options? What format is the file given
> to the -data option supposed to be in?
> Thanks
> On Friday, February 20, 2015 2:14 PM, William Colen <
> william.colen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Are you using 1.5.3? Can you send a small sample?
>
> Em segunda-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2015, Richard Head Jr.
> <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid> escreveu:
>
> I ran the command line evaluator several times on tokenized/untokenized
> and large/small input but get no results (see below). The model appears to
> be finding tokens quite well, I'd just like to evaluate *how* well:
>
> opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -data some-data.txt -model a-model.bin
> Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.111s)
>
>
> Average: 104.2 sent/s
> Total: 15 sent
> Runtime: 0.144s
>
> Precision: 0.0
> Recall: 0.0
> F-Measure: -1.0
>
> Now on a larger set of data:
>
> opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -encoding latin1 -data /tmp/db-raw.txt
> -model a-model.bin
> Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.156s)
> current: 364.9 sent/s avg: 364.9 sent/s total: 366 sent
> current: 427.4 sent/s avg: 396.1 sent/s total: 793 sent
>
>
> Average: 477.7 sent/s
> Total: 1434 sent
> Runtime: 3.002s
>
> Precision: 0.0
> Recall: 0.0
> F-Measure: -1.0
>
>
>
> What am I doing wrong?
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> --
> William Colen
>
>
>
>
Re: TokenNameFinderEvaluator Outputting No Stats
Posted by "Richard Head Jr." <hs...@yahoo.com.INVALID>.
> Are you using 1.5.3?
Yes.
> Can you send a small sample?
I can't send the model. Any other options? What format is the file given to the -data option supposed to be in?
Thanks
On Friday, February 20, 2015 2:14 PM, William Colen <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
Are you using 1.5.3? Can you send a small sample?
Em segunda-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2015, Richard Head Jr. <hs...@yahoo.com.invalid> escreveu:
I ran the command line evaluator several times on tokenized/untokenized and large/small input but get no results (see below). The model appears to be finding tokens quite well, I'd just like to evaluate *how* well:
opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -data some-data.txt -model a-model.bin
Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.111s)
Average: 104.2 sent/s
Total: 15 sent
Runtime: 0.144s
Precision: 0.0
Recall: 0.0
F-Measure: -1.0
Now on a larger set of data:
opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -encoding latin1 -data /tmp/db-raw.txt -model a-model.bin
Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.156s)
current: 364.9 sent/s avg: 364.9 sent/s total: 366 sent
current: 427.4 sent/s avg: 396.1 sent/s total: 793 sent
Average: 477.7 sent/s
Total: 1434 sent
Runtime: 3.002s
Precision: 0.0
Recall: 0.0
F-Measure: -1.0
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks
--
William Colen
Re: TokenNameFinderEvaluator Outputting No Stats
Posted by William Colen <wi...@gmail.com>.
Are you using 1.5.3? Can you send a small sample?
Em segunda-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2015, Richard Head Jr.
<hs...@yahoo.com.invalid> escreveu:
> I ran the command line evaluator several times on tokenized/untokenized
> and large/small input but get no results (see below). The model appears to
> be finding tokens quite well, I'd just like to evaluate *how* well:
>
> opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -data some-data.txt -model a-model.bin
> Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.111s)
>
>
> Average: 104.2 sent/s
> Total: 15 sent
> Runtime: 0.144s
>
> Precision: 0.0
> Recall: 0.0
> F-Measure: -1.0
>
> Now on a larger set of data:
>
> opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -encoding latin1 -data /tmp/db-raw.txt
> -model a-model.bin
> Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.156s)
> current: 364.9 sent/s avg: 364.9 sent/s total: 366 sent
> current: 427.4 sent/s avg: 396.1 sent/s total: 793 sent
>
>
> Average: 477.7 sent/s
> Total: 1434 sent
> Runtime: 3.002s
>
> Precision: 0.0
> Recall: 0.0
> F-Measure: -1.0
>
>
>
> What am I doing wrong?
>
>
> Thanks
>
--
William Colen