jackmarxist [any]@hexbear.net to chapotraphouse@hexbear.netEnglish · 5 months ago289% Inflation lmaohexbear.netimagemessage-square46fedilinkarrow-up1194arrow-down11
arrow-up1193arrow-down1image289% Inflation lmaohexbear.netjackmarxist [any]@hexbear.net to chapotraphouse@hexbear.netEnglish · 5 months agomessage-square46fedilink
minus-squareOwl [he/him]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·5 months agoJust keep taking derivatives and eventually you’ll find one going in the direction you want.
minus-squareqaopjlll [he/him]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·5 months agoThis is e^x erasure
minus-squareOwl [he/him]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·5 months agoHah, yeah. But on a real-world data set, even if the underlying phenomenon is e^x, you’ll keep amplifying sample noise until the derivatives are basically random. Assuming you even have enough data to keep taking derivatives.
Just keep taking derivatives and eventually you’ll find one going in the direction you want.
This is e^x erasure
Hah, yeah.
But on a real-world data set, even if the underlying phenomenon is e^x, you’ll keep amplifying sample noise until the derivatives are basically random. Assuming you even have enough data to keep taking derivatives.