Timeline for Recursively calculate the determinant
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 14, 2016 at 22:09 | vote | accept | Wuchen | ||
| Apr 22, 2016 at 18:19 | comment | added | Wuchen | Thank you for your suggestion. I have changed the notation. | |
| Apr 22, 2016 at 18:18 | history | edited | Wuchen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 124 characters in body
|
| Apr 22, 2016 at 10:31 | answer | added | Liviu Nicolaescu | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 22, 2016 at 8:57 | comment | added | Wolfgang | For better legibility, I'd suggest that you replace $\theta^{1} = (\theta^{1}_1, \ldots, \theta^{1}_k)$ by e.g. $V = (v_1, \ldots, v_k)$ and $\theta^{2} = (\theta^{2}_1, \ldots, \theta^{2}_k)$ by $W = (w_1, \ldots, w_k)$ where the $v_i$ and $w_i$ are vectors of length $p_i$. Using upper indexes is not a good idea when powers are also involved! So you'd have $a =v_1^{\top} \Sigma_{11} w_1$ (I suppose not $w_1^{\top}$) etc. | |
| Apr 22, 2016 at 4:02 | history | edited | Wuchen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
clarify the definition of $\Sigma_{\theta}$
|
| S Apr 22, 2016 at 3:50 | history | suggested | Minkov | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Typo fixes.
|
| Apr 22, 2016 at 3:48 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Apr 22, 2016 at 3:50 | |||||
| Apr 22, 2016 at 3:10 | history | asked | Wuchen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |