Like we did with question 1, this will be the solution to the question we posed in the last post, if you haven’t tried to solve it yet, go give it a shot. If you have and are dying to check your answer, then let’s look at the solution.*
For those of you who have been following along, today we are going to post another question and in the next post we will give the solution. This will be another two random variable question and we’ve covered everything you need to solve it in our previous posts. So with that, let’s get to today’s question.*
Hopefully if you’re reading this you saw our last post, where we gave the question we will solve today. If you haven’t had a chance to try and solve it, please feel free to stop and give it a shot. If you’re ready to see how we solve it, then let’s get started.*
Well now that we’ve had a minute to take a breath, let’s try out something new. In this post I will give the question and in the next post we can work out the answer. For those of you playing at home, this will be a good way to check your knowledge and for me, it will give the the chance to do the same.*
Okay quick example, still not super difficult, but one we can work out to a complete solution. We’ve gone over a few examples now, but we’re going to go over a few more for both my benefit and yours. So let’s dive in.*
Well our last post we took a break and talked zombies! While I would love to do a whole month of halloween topics, this year is not the time, maybe next year. In any case today we are going to go over another example of a single function of two random variables. This is going to be slightly more complex than our first example, however it won’t be extremely complex (we’re working towards it). So let’s take a look shall we?*
Hopefully at this point we’ve demystified more than just a few concepts at this point. Today we are going to look at one function of two random variables. Originally I was going to break into a joint CDF example that involved dependent variables, but it turns out my book doesn’t cover that! Oops, guess I should’ve read ahead. In any case let’s talk functions!*
Well here we are again, today we are talking functions of two random variables. If you’re looking for the beginning, this isn’t it, but you can read the introduction here. If you’ve kept up, then you’re ready to go over the example we have today, so let’s get started.*
As promised, today we are going to talk about two random variables that are not independent. This means that the individual probabilities don’t sum to be equal to the joint probability (like they did yesterday). Like our normal CDF, we can find a CDF for two random variables, but let’s take a look at how this works.*
I was debating about not posting anything today. It’s been a bit rough for me these past few days. However, I’m going to write a little something today and tomorrow to introduce two random variables (so we don’t skip a day). This is going to be a lot like our single random variable examples, but (of course) more complex, let’s take a look at what I mean.*
Well maybe yesterday was confusing, maybe it wasn’t. In any case, today should clarify some things for you if you are confused and should make things more clear if you are not. Today we are going to go over a quick example of what a function involving one random variable looks like. Now you may notice I keep saying one, that’s because you can technically have as many variables as you want, but since this is fairy complex stuff, let’s just stick with the one for now.*
Now that we’ve looked at conditional probabilities we can talk about other things we can do with random variables. If you’ve been keeping up with us so far, then this shouldn’t be too crazy of an idea, really all we are going to do today is take a random variable and transform it somehow. Interested? Let’s go!*
Up to now we’ve been dealing with single variable pdf and the corresponding CDF. We said that these probabilities relied on the fact that our variable of interest was independent. However, what if we knew some property that impacted our probability? Today we are talking conditional probability and that is the question we will be answering. It’s going to be a long, long post so plan accordingly.*
Maybe we shouldn’t phrase it this way, since there is still quite a few days left of 365DoA, but you made it to the end! No, not THE end, but if you’ve been following along the past few posts we’ve introduced several seemingly disparate concepts and said, “don’t worry they are related,” without telling you how. Well today, like a magician showing you how to pull a rabbit from a hat, let’s connect the dots and explain why we introduced all those concepts!*
Over the past couple of days, I’ve been talking about several different types of pdf and the associated C.D.F. Hopefully, we have a clear understanding of each of those concepts, for those of you scratching your head, I would recommend you start here at this other post. Otherwise, let’s (finally) look at a real life example using the exponential pdf!*
Well here we are again… maybe unless you’re new, in which case welcome. If you are just joining us we are talking p.d.f. no not the file format, the probability density function version. If you’re new, you may want to start back here(ish) If not, then let’s talk the strangely similar laplace distribution.*
Well, it has been a week, don’t even get me started. But if you’re here you don’t want to hear me complain about my week, that isn’t why we come together! Well today let’s do a bit of a dive into the exponential p.d.f. I hope you’ve brushed up, because this is going to get interesting.*
Day 30 already! Where does the time go? It feels like we just started this whole project and it probably wouldn’t be a good idea to look at the remaining time to completion, so let’s not and just enjoy the nice round 30. We will get back to our p.d.f another day, but today is going to be short. That’s what I usually say before typing out 10 pages worth of information so to avoid that, let’s touch on something important, but something I can do briefly. Today we’re talking about confidence intervals*
Well, apparently you guys really appreciated my probability density function posts. It’s good to see people interested in something a little less well-known (at least to me). So for those of you just joining us, you’ll want to start at part 1 here. For those of you who are keeping up with the posts, let’s review and then look at specific functions. Namely let’s start by going back to our gaussian distribution function and talk about what’s going on with that whole mess. It will be fun, so let’s do it!*
Today we were going to do another deep dive into the p.d.f and C.D.F. relationship. Specifically today we were going to talk about specific p.d.f. functions and why we use them, however… I am not doing so hot today, so instead we are going to back track just a bit and talk about what how a C.D.F. differs from our p.d.f. even though we kind of covered it, it would be nice to be clear and I can do this in a (fairly) short post for the day. So that said, let’s get started and we will pick up our p.d.f. discussion next time (maybe).*
Oh hi didn’t see you there. Today is part 2 of the probability density functions notes (posts?), whatever we are calling these. You can read part 1 here as you should probably be familiar with the (super confusing) notation we use to describe our p.d.f. and our C.D.F. now that we’ve given that lovely disclaimer, let’s look once again at probability density functions!*
We are well on our way to wrapping up week 4, what a ride it’s been! It’s been a long day for me, so today might be short. However, I really, really, really want to break into probability density functions. This topic is going to be a bit more advanced than some of the things we’ve covered (IE more writing) so it will most definitely be broken up. Let’s look at why and discover the wonderful weirdness of probability density functions!*
Last post we introduced a new tool in our arsenal of signal processing analysis, the spectrogram. Without knowing how to read it, it just looks sort of like a colored mess. Don’t get me wrong, it is an interesting looking colored mess, but a mess nonetheless. Well today we are going to talk about how to interpret the plot and why exactly we would ever use this seeming monstrosity.*
To (somewhat) continue with our signal processing theme that we have going on at the moment, over the next few days, let’s look at something called the spectrogram. It’s three dimensions of fun!*
Typically when scientists make a measurement, they know exactly what kind of measurement they’re making, and their purpose is to obtain a measurement outcome. But in an “unrecorded measurement,” both the type of measurement and the measurement outcome are unknown.
UNSW Australia scientists have shown that complex human brain activity is governed by the same simple universal rule of nature that can explain other phenomena such as the beautiful sound of a finely crafted violin or the spots on a leopard. The UNSW team has identified a link between the distinctive patterns of brain function that occur at rest and the physical structure of people’s brains.
In “Star Trek”, a transporter can teleport a person from one location to a remote location without actually making the journey along the way. Such a transporter has fascinated many people. Quantum teleportation shares several features of the transporter and is one of the most important protocols in quantum information.
Why send a message back in time, but lock it so that no one can ever read the contents? Because it may be the key to solving currently intractable problems. It turns out that an unopened message can be exceedingly useful. This is true if the experimenter entangles the message with some other system in the laboratory before sending it.
Since I’m apparently feeling a little punny…
While mass media was busy misquoting Stephen Hawking and arguing about black holes, astrophysicists have been hard at work trying to solve still unanswered questions about them. Now a team has not only proven that a supermassive black hole exists in a place where it isn’t supposed to be, but in doing so have opened a new door to what things were like in the early universe.