tidytext
Finished, widely taught, and shipping roxygen fixes.
A side-by-side editorial comparison of mlr3fselect and workflowsets — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.
mlr3fselect turned feature selection into an asynchronous, distributable job
mlr3fselect runs feature selection for mlr3. The defining change in this window is 1.4.0, which introduced FSelectorAsync and the asynchronous instance classes, letting searches run without a synchronous batch loop. Around it sit ensemble feature selection work — fastVoteR ranking, embedded ensemble selection, result combination — and performance work on objective evaluation.
workflowsets keeps widening what counts as a model worth comparing.
workflowsets holds a grid of preprocessor and model combinations and evaluates all of them under one call to workflow_map(). The releases in view widen that grid — clustering specifications via tidyclust, censored regression via an eval_time argument, case weights — and fill in the accessors around it with collect_notes(), collect_extracts() and fit_best(). The long-running pull_*() deprecation finally reached the error stage in 1.1.1.
mlr3fselect runs feature selection for mlr3. The defining change in this window is 1.4.0, which introduced FSelectorAsync and the asynchronous instance classes, letting searches run without a synchronous batch loop. Around it sit ensemble feature selection work — fastVoteR ranking, embedded ensemble selection, result combination — and performance work on objective evaluation.
Two threads run in parallel: scaling the search itself through async execution and the rush backend, and making ensemble selection results easier to analyse via Pareto fronts, knee points and now removal of empty result rows. The rush backward-compatibility shim was dropped in 1.6.0, so the async path is now the assumed one.
Expect the ensemble result API to keep gaining analysis helpers, with async execution treated as the default rather than an option.
workflowsets holds a grid of preprocessor and model combinations and evaluates all of them under one call to workflow_map(). The releases in view widen that grid — clustering specifications via tidyclust, censored regression via an eval_time argument, case weights — and fill in the accessors around it with collect_notes(), collect_extracts() and fit_best(). The long-running pull_*() deprecation finally reached the error stage in 1.1.1.
The package's job is comparison, so its direction is set by what tidymodels can express: every time a new model paradigm lands elsewhere, workflowsets has to learn to rank it. Clustering was the largest of those steps because it has no outcome column to score against. Alongside that runs a slower cleanup — named-only optional arguments, type checking on inputs, informative errors when someone passes a workflow set to fit() — that reads as a package hardening after its API settled.
Expect the tailor postprocessors that workflows added in 1.3.0 to need representation here next, since a workflow set that cannot vary the postprocessor cannot compare calibration choices.
Other Analytics products tracked by Sparkpulse, ranked by recent ship velocity. Each card links to a full editorial trajectory and lets you pivot into a head-to-head comparison with either mlr3fselect or workflowsets.
Finished, widely taught, and shipping roxygen fixes.
Text features finally stay sparse all the way to the model.
The package that made calibration a step instead of an afterthought.
The tidymodels pipeline grew a third stage, and it happens after the model runs.
Posit's MLOps package went quiet for two years, then came back to keep up with recipes.
patchwork stopped being a ggplot composer and became a page composer.
See all mlr3fselect alternatives → · See all workflowsets alternatives →
Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.
They serve adjacent needs but don't currently overlap on shipped themes. mlr3fselect and workflowsets are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). See the at-a-glance table above for a side-by-side breakdown of velocity, recent sparks, and editorial themes.
Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. mlr3fselect and workflowsets are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). For your specific use case, the alternatives sections above list other Analytics products to evaluate alongside.
Top mlr3fselect alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "mlr3fselect alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/mlr3fselect for the full list with editorial commentary on each.
Top workflowsets alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "workflowsets alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/workflowsets for the full list with editorial commentary on each.