Timeline for Worst-Case Solution to (Stochastic) Matrix Inequality
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 26, 2014 at 5:23 | comment | added | M.Burtke | (PS: In case it makes a difference, I explain the reason for the vagueness of the initial question. I used such a bound for a very nice, symmetric collection of matrices in the middle of a calculation in a recent paper, and was able to do everything by hand. I now have a bunch of examples where I'd like to do `the same' calculation, and this is the one step where I seem to be using the symmetry of the initial calculation in a way that I don't understand.) | |
| Nov 26, 2014 at 5:02 | comment | added | M.Burtke | Dear Steve, fedja: Thank you for the thought and the comments. I added one precise (though perhaps overly optimistic) conjecture, and related it to mixing times. As I say, I am also interested in partial results, but I understand that it is a little unfair to ask for partial results without saying what they are part of! Thanks again. | |
| Nov 26, 2014 at 4:54 | history | edited | M.Burtke | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 893 characters in body
|
| Nov 26, 2014 at 2:05 | comment | added | fedja | Nice question but it is totally unclear where what you want to know differs from what you do know and what exactly you are trying to get. It would be much better (for me, at least), if there was some clearly posed yes/no type problem (with understanding that if the answer is "yes", you get all you need, and if it is "no", then the ball goes back to your court and you think of how to save the question to keep it useful for your purposes or decide that the game is over). | |
| Nov 25, 2014 at 22:33 | comment | added | Steve Huntsman | It might help to reformulate your desired conclusion in terms of a mixing time. | |
| Nov 25, 2014 at 18:06 | review | First posts | |||
| Nov 25, 2014 at 18:20 | |||||
| Nov 25, 2014 at 18:06 | history | asked | M.Burtke | CC BY-SA 3.0 |