Help, math gurus!

[jes6ica]

Comments

[swestrup]

I'm not sure what you're asking, nor which standard notation you are referring to, but that Pi isn't 'π'. Its more like Pi, and in computer science would be written P[i]. The same is true of Ni and Mi.

[jes6ica]

I realized that after I was looking again at things. I guess the thing is, I know that B(n, k) should be

n
( )
k
(This is my ASCII approximation of choose).

And B(Ni, x) should be:
Ni
( )
x

(and the i should be subscript)

But I'm not sure where to stop. What about:

P(X = x | R, Ni, Mi) or n! / (k! ∙ (n - k)!)

Do they need to be changed, and if so, how?

[swestrup]

Conditional probabilites are ususually written out as P(condition | variables) in math texts, as in this example about Bayes' Theorum

[lizardek]

I feel faint now. Must go lie down with cold cloth on forehead.

[jes6ica]

Sorry. Yucky work stuff that I can't ask them since they're 6 hours ahead. :P

"Put this stuff in standard notation," they say. "WhaHuh?!?" replies I.

[swestrup]

Its pretty good. I would make two changes though. First, I would put the limits over the summation as is normal, so instead of:

∑ P(X = x | R, Ni, Mi); x = Ki, ..., min(Ni, Mi)

One would use
Ki
∑P(X = x | R, Ni, Mi)
min(Ni,Mi)

And I would also change the division slash (/) between the two probabilites so that one is above the other, like in a fraction.

[swestrup]

Oops, that should be 'x = Ki' above the summation...

[d3katja]

I agree with what Swestrup says, including the x=Ki above the sigma sign.
It took me a while to understand the question, but now I get it. It has been too long since I did math of this type.

[jes6ica]

Actually, I asked Tomas A if he wanted that, and it seems he thought it was good enough with just the bit I did above. Pfft. So why did he bother wanting it in standard notation if he only wanted part of it? And also, if he'd left the text as it was originally, that topic would have taken 20 minutes...as it was, it took 7 hours just to get all the formatting right. bah!