jackmarxist [any]@hexbear.net to Chapotraphouse@hexbear.netEnglish · 2 years ago289% Inflation lmaohexbear.netimagemessage-square43fedilinkarrow-up1194
arrow-up1194image289% Inflation lmaohexbear.netjackmarxist [any]@hexbear.net to Chapotraphouse@hexbear.netEnglish · 2 years agomessage-square43fedilink
minus-squareOwl [he/him]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·2 years agoJust keep taking derivatives and eventually you’ll find one going in the direction you want.
minus-squareOwl [he/him]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·1 year 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.