Weighted pearson

[matsumotosan]

What does this PR do?

Fixes part of #1235

New PR for #1759

• Create separate class for weighted Pearson (similar to weighted MAPE)

previous PR tried to create single class for weighted and unweighted Pearson but that could result in someone trying to use the metric initialized as unweighted and later change to weighted (and vice versa)

• Was this discussed/agreed via a Github issue? (no need for typos and docs improvements)
• Did you read the contributor guideline, Pull Request section?
• Did you make sure to update the docs?
• Did you write any new necessary tests?

PR review

Anyone in the community is free to review the PR once the tests have passed.
If we didn't discuss your PR in Github issues there's a high chance it will not be merged.

Did you have fun?

Make sure you had fun coding 🙃

[Borda]

@matsumotosan how is it going here? 🦩

[matsumotosan]

@Borda Going to move over the test cases from the previous PR. Now that the weighted and unweighted metrics are separate, tests should be easier to write.

[Borda]

Going to move over the test cases from the previous PR. Now that the weighted and unweighted metrics are separate, tests should be easier to write.

sounds cool :)

[Borda]

it would be great to ave this landed and then we can do another feature release :)

[Borda]

@matsumotosan do you have a time estimate for finishing this one?
There is not pressure, I just need to understand if we should wait for it for the next incoming release or just leave it for the next one 🦩

[matsumotosan]

@Borda Working on it right now, I think I might need a week.

[Borda]

Working on it right now, I think I might need a week.

@matsumotosan please check Nicki comments :)

[matsumotosan]

This change is breaking class tests for metrics like precision, recall, MAP, MRR, fallout.

[Borda]

Cc @SkafteNicki

[Copilot]

Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.