You cannot sign up to Kaggle from multiple accounts and therefore you cannot submit from multiple accounts.
\r\n\r\n Privately sharing code or data outside of teams is not permitted.\r\n It's okay to share code if made available to all participants on the forums.\r\n
\r\nTeam mergers are not allowed in this competition.
\r\n\r\nThere is no maximum team size.
\r\nYou may submit a maximum of 2 entries per day.
\r\nYou may select up to 2 final submissions for judging.
\r\nStart Date: TBA
\r\nMerger Deadline: None
\r\nEntry Deadline: None
\r\nEnd Date: 2/1/2014 12:00 AM UTC
\r\n\t\r\nThe rules page is a bit special: it will auto-update the text based on the parameters of the competition. The rules you need to add here are any additional rules relating to dataset usage. You may also put grading information here.
", "isPublished": false, "hasIsPublished": false, "postTitle": "", "hasPostTitle": false, "mimeType": "", "hasMimeType": false }, { "name": "data-description", "content": "The dataset is a csv file with three columns: user_id, item_id, and ratings. Rating describes if the user liked (1) or disliked (0) a particular item.
\nYou will find in the train.csv file several instances of user, item interactions, your goal is to predict the top 3 items to recommend to a user among those he didn't interact with yet. To make your life a little bit easier we provided a test_empty.csv file with the possible items for each user, as some (user, item) interactions are unobserved in the test set.
\nHere you will find some utils to help you, for instance, if you fill add a rating column to test_empty.csv you will be able through the function top_by_user to keep only the top-k items per user because that is what is expected in the submission phase.
\nWelcome to the EngML challenge 2018, please keep in mind this was organized in a few hours, so this is probably shit, but the goal is to have fun altogether around an uninteresting dataset.
", "isPublished": false, "hasIsPublished": false, "postTitle": "", "hasPostTitle": false, "mimeType": "", "hasMimeType": false }, { "name": "Evaluation", "content": "The evaluation pages describes how submissions will be scored and how students should format their submissions. You don't need a sub-title at the top (the page title appears above). For an example of a high quality evaluation page, see the 2013 KDD Cup page, which we have copied here:
\r\nThe evaluation metric for this competition is Mean F1-Score. The F1 score, commonly used in information retrieval, measures accuracy using the statistics precision p and recall r. Precision is the ratio of true positives (tp) to all predicted positives (tp + fp). Recall is the ratio of true positives to all actual positives (tp + fn). The F1 score is given by:
\r\n\\[ F1 = 2\\frac{p \\cdot r}{p+r}\\ \\ \\mathrm{where}\\ \\ p = \\frac{tp}{tp+fp},\\ \\ r = \\frac{tp}{tp+fn} \\]
\r\nThe F1 metric weights recall and precision equally, and a good retrieval algorithm will maximize both precision and recall simultaneously. Thus, moderately good performance on both will be favored over extremely good performance on one and poor performance on the other.
\r\nFor every author in the dataset, submission files should contain two columns: AuthorId and DuplicateAuthorIds. DuplicateAuthorIds should be a space-delimited list. Every AuthorId counts as his/her own duplicate, and every duplicate should be listed under each of its respective ids. For example, if you suspect author A, B, and C are the same, you should list (A,A B C), (B,B A C), (C,C A B).
\r\nThe file should contain a header and have the following format:
\r\nAuthorId,DuplicateAuthorIds", "isPublished": false, "hasIsPublished": false, "postTitle": "", "hasPostTitle": false, "mimeType": "", "hasMimeType": false } ] }
1,1
8,8
9,9 10
10,10 9
etc.