View Single Post
  #1  
Old 03-17-2013, 07:00 PM
junjy junjy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2
Question Description on page 55

First, a general comment: Prof. Abu-Mostafa made things really really clear, my million thanks!

Here I have a small confusion: On p.55, line 6, it says "(What the growth function ...), so we can get a factor similar to the '100' in the above example".

The analogy makes the general idea 100 times more comprehensible than plunging into the proof directly. However, here I minded a gap. Can anybody help if this is my misunderstanding or I am right in this point ?

- the '100' is a "good" guy in the above example, which "condenses" (so shrink) the coloured area that times much.
- the growth function, on the other hand, is a bad guy, which gives that much ways for hypotheses behaving differently on the canvas, and "smears" the colours

So I think they are more inversely comparable, e.g. if the example is given as follows:

However many hypotheses in \mathcal{H}, then can only behave in m ways. Therefore, each point on the canvas that is coloured will be coloured M/m times.
Reply With Quote