Timeline for Removing subtrees
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 22, 2014 at 8:12 | vote | accept | Pablo | ||
| Dec 22, 2014 at 7:41 | comment | added | Bjørn Kjos-Hanssen | Yes, implicitly I meant that (see version before I edited the answer if you can). And yes, 2 is satisfied. Take a look at the proof of the strong law of large numbers to see why. | |
| Dec 22, 2014 at 7:31 | comment | added | Pablo | This is a good idea. The problem is that even though 1 and 2 are satisfied, I do not see why this set of sequences can be obtained by removing subtrees as I required. What you can get by removing subtrees, is the set of sequences with every prefix having at most 2/3 1s. In this case, is 2 satisfied? | |
| Dec 21, 2014 at 21:21 | history | answered | Bjørn Kjos-Hanssen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |