Chessability

Пікірлер

@ferg Күн бұрын

Thanks for the explanation!

@wondilo 17 күн бұрын

this explanation was so clear and helped me understand this so much better thanks so much

@christinapapoula23 Ай бұрын

I am trying to run this code in my R-studio but I get a really different outcome than yours even if i try the same steps. Where can i find this R-code script?

@harishsivaramakrishnan7096 Ай бұрын

This is one of the most brilliant games out there! So was Gufeld title this himelf as the mona lisa of chess?

@natanfurman2467 Ай бұрын

stunning game wow

@nictamer8754 Ай бұрын

Idk, somehow this messes with me. Two things: I cant understand why it makes no difference. I see it this way: If I go second, there is a chance that the first guy already lost, meaning I win. If I go first however that chance does not exist. Furthermore, second is better in the sense that if it does go to shot 5 and the other guy survives it, you know that the bullet is in the sixth chamber so naturally you dont have to pull the trigger if that makes sense.

@trolltoll440 2 ай бұрын

very nice - Borat

@trolltoll440 2 ай бұрын

very nice - borat

@trolltoll440 2 ай бұрын

I think there might be a mistake - shouldnt the sum be from x=0 to infinity not s=0 infinity? Sure looks like that judging from the working

@VincentWillems-o1d 6 күн бұрын

Yeah, saw that too

@trolltoll440 2 ай бұрын

"Very nice" - Borat

@gippers 2 ай бұрын

Great video, this way so helpful and explained really clearly. Thank you!

@SubhashChandraDey-h2m 2 ай бұрын

Liked the first 9 minutes. I hope I like the entire playlist

@tishadhande1105 2 ай бұрын

Can we equate sample harmonic mean with 1/E(1/X) in this method?

@rahulramesh4922 2 ай бұрын

why is the probability p/q and not 1 for the case of p<q?

@barrnycharlton8951 3 ай бұрын

PLEASE COME BACK AND DO A STOCHASTIC SERIES :(

@thepatientone676 4 ай бұрын

How do we get the weights when there are more than two stocks?

@victorvargas8823 5 ай бұрын

great video, thanks so much

@chessability. 4 ай бұрын

Thank you for watching!

@DayumTreeStump 5 ай бұрын

Stumbled onto this, and it really clarified things -- thank you, Professor. To anyone looking upon: what really helped things click was working out how a random walk works, then watching this. Much love.

@chessability. 5 ай бұрын

So glad it was helpful! I'm not quite a Professor :)

@stellacoraggiosa1476 5 ай бұрын

Solving the equation is not clear to me because only if p>q then you can take (p-q) out of |p-q| right? But you just did it and then made two cases.

@magnus.discipulus 5 ай бұрын

I have no problems plugging in the numbers. But why are we still considering X's probability density function if we're looking at X^2? That's the big question for me. The probability function X^2 is different from that of X, still we can manage to use that from X only, I can't wrap my head around it nor I can understand its geometrical intuition.

@bahramshahrooz4213 5 ай бұрын

Thank you for posting an excellent video. I learned so much!!! I'm trying to come up with a return of my portfolio that has several mutual funds. At least one of them doesn't have all the data (e.g., it starts on 2020-01-02 whereas the others start on 2007-01-03). As a result, I can't combine the returns. Do you've a suggestion for how to solve this issue?

@chessability. 5 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching! Yes, there are a few options... you could 'backfill' the data from 2007 - 2020 for that mutual fund by sampling the 2020-2024 data over and over. This gives you a sense of what the returns 'would have been' But I don't think I would recommend that, especially because 2020/2021 had pretty extreme performance, and so the backfill might be skewed. Instead, I would just recommend assigning a weight of 0 to that mutual fund from 2007-2020, and then increasing the weight once the mutual fund 'comes online'. That's the most realistic way: you had zero weight in the fund beforehand! Does that make sense?

@bahramshahrooz4213 5 ай бұрын

@@chessability. Thanks for getting back to me. Yes, your suggestion makes a lot of sense. I'm somewhat familiar with R but don't know to elegantly add 0 weigh for 2007-2020. I appreciate your help.

@chessability. 5 ай бұрын

@@bahramshahrooz4213 For sure! If your weight vector is called w, and you want to set the first 100 elements to 0, just try w[1:100] <- 0

@bahramshahrooz4213 5 ай бұрын

@@chessability. Thanks for your help. I've learned so much in the last 24 hours by watching your video and getting your responses. I really appreciate it.

@chessability. 5 ай бұрын

@@bahramshahrooz4213 Of course! Let me know if I can help with anything else!

@JuhoKim-qg1tk 5 ай бұрын

Thank you so much

@chessability. 5 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching Juho!

@grenneda 5 ай бұрын

you sir, have saved my degree. you explain things so simply and i appreciate you so so much :) <3

@chessability. 5 ай бұрын

So glad it's been helpful!

@Matt-tg6vi 6 ай бұрын

thanks

@tonysears9870 6 ай бұрын

Having run a Russian Roulette spreadsheet simulation 100,000 times I can say that it is better to go second. Person 1 dies on average 51.7% of the time compared to person 2 who dies 48.3% of the time... Your symmetry scenario does not accurately reflect the underlying probabilities..

@starry7544 6 ай бұрын

Always happy to see a king's indian in top level play!

@chessability. 6 ай бұрын

For sure!

@random1-c4y 7 ай бұрын

I am a Student at Stevens doing my Msc in Fin Eng, this is a great video, thank you. I love the fact that you kept the concept at the forefront and used the maths as a supplement

@chessability. 7 ай бұрын

Thank you! Appreciate you watching!

@eatonhuang6221 7 ай бұрын

Very useful!

@chessability. 7 ай бұрын

So glad it was helpful!

@umersajjad7431 7 ай бұрын

I was searching for the lotus Equation and how it happens... I was thinking how it can relate to the real lotus... Does mathematics has to do with our life how we were made... Thanks anyway...

@chessability. 7 ай бұрын

Haha, in this case LoTUS stands for "law of the unthinking statistician", so I don't think it has anything to do with the flower :)

@olitomar 7 ай бұрын

the clicking and highlighting needs to stop haha

@caitlinmccormick8135 7 ай бұрын

Hiya, what Monte Carlo Simulation method would you say you used here?

@chessability. 7 ай бұрын

Hello! I think the proper terminology is that this is just a "Monte Carlo simulation." In this specific case we're looking at a Monte Carlo simulation to test for portfolio downside. Does that help?

@ActMIRANDARAZOANGEL 9 ай бұрын

Nice video bro Could you recommend a bibliography or some sources to obtain more information about prior and posterior distributions?

@chessability. 7 ай бұрын

Hello! This chapter from my book discusses a lot of it: bookdown.org/probability/inference2/bayesian-inference.html

@edbuffey5979 9 ай бұрын

How do I close that "Kyle throws a hail mary" overlay off? It's the most annoying thing to watch a video and not be able to close it.

@edbuffey5979 9 ай бұрын

I hate this channel has that overlay near the end of the video. Can we move these important videos to a venue that doesn't do this?

@vusalagayev698 9 ай бұрын

Hello. Thank you for your well-explained videos, I would like to contact to you, could you please leave me email. (I want to learn stochastic proccesses from basics and I need online tutor)

@acbrog 10 ай бұрын

What a beautiful immortal. Well presented, too!

@chessability. 10 ай бұрын

Absolutely! Thank you for watching :)

@vedantgujar3149 10 ай бұрын

Why pawn h3 is needed?

@chessability. 10 ай бұрын

Haha fair point... it's not! You can play knight to e5 right away :)

@Ramilnillas 11 ай бұрын

What if he takes the knight instead of the queen

@chessability. 11 ай бұрын

Then the queen takes the bishop, and there is a ton of pressure attacking black's kingside!

@ddDeaaaan Жыл бұрын

This is great, perfect combo of complexity and insight

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

Thanks so much for watching!

@patrickorourke3710 Жыл бұрын

When you put O^O in the calculator, it is undefined. In your video, you have 0^0+1. Can you explain what is correct and why please? Also, your videos are a God-send as they are helping me through Stochastic Modeling this semester bro!

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

Hello! So glad it's useful. Yeah, this is a great question. Some fields of mathematics define 0^0 as 1, some say it's undefined. Some more info here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_to_the_power_of_zero Does that help?

@patrickorourke3710 Жыл бұрын

@@chessability. Thanks for your reply and yes, this link explains the question very well!

@studentofspacetime Жыл бұрын

Hi. I've been following your videos, they are very nicely made. I have a question about your section 7.2.4: Once you're treating the asymmetric case, I don´t see how you arrive at the same formula for log(1+u) and log(1+d) as in the symmetric case. Given that p is not 1/2, your parameter 'sigma' as it appears in their formulae cannot possibly correspond to a variance any longer, since now you have to take weighted averages of the squared variables.

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

Thank you so much for watching! I think I might be a bit confused... isn't \sigma^2 here just the variance of each \lambda? I'm not sure if it matters that p is no longer 1/2.

@nyselmech Жыл бұрын

aaaha now i get it, thank you

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

Awesome!

@nyselmech Жыл бұрын

@@chessability. do you have any idea to how to prove rigorously

@derinncagan Жыл бұрын

Hey just wanted to ask something, in the first equation; we assumed that we are already on the first step thus, we added 1 then since we are on the first step reached (1) the probability of going up will be 0. No problem until here, but; you are mentioning that you are at 0 when illustrating that you are going down, but you mentioned that we were at (1) in the other parts of the equation. If we are at one, and if we go down (0) and 1 step for going there and 1 step for going back to (0) to (1) again? Could you please clear that for me? Thank you so much!!

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

Thanks for watching! Yes, this is a little confusing. We add 1 because we have already taken the first step... but then we have two different cases: if the first step went up (there is zero wait time left, because we just hit 1) or the first step went down (we now have to go up 2 steps to get to 1). Does that help?

@derinncagan Жыл бұрын

You are an awesome person dude! Helped me a lot!

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

Thanks so much for watching!

@hongdo5912 Жыл бұрын

Your explanation is so clear and easy to follow. Thank you for your work!

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

Thank you for watching!

@hongdo5912 Жыл бұрын

Thank you so much! Your explanation has helped me a lot in understanding the Bayesian approach.

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

Thanks so much for watching, glad it helped out!

@geauxgaia Жыл бұрын

Awesome!! 💗 lit with great vibes 💥🙏

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

Thanks!

@RaffsterTabs Жыл бұрын

Nf8 more stylish than Nc5 ;)

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

Indeed!

@rolandobrien Жыл бұрын

I don't like this example very much. Maybe some background will help? Why 2n people? What not just make n = 4 and for your example say how many combinations of 2 out of ABCD can be made?

@ytdencolo 8 ай бұрын

I agree that the presentation of 2n without context can be confusing. 2n ensures that all people can be paired without leaving someone unpaired -- this could also be stated n people where n is even, or n people where n % 2 = 0. With that underlying assumption, the problem can then be generalized for all numbers of people that can be paired without a remainder.

@al_cuber Жыл бұрын

What if he takes?

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

Sorry, which piece do you mean?

@al_cuber Жыл бұрын

NVM I understand now 😊

@chessability. Жыл бұрын

@@al_cuberGreat!

Ең жақсы KZbin

Пікірлер