Skip to main content

Timeline for Reachability for Markov process

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

11 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Feb 21, 2012 at 14:02 history edited SBF CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 1 characters in body
Dec 23, 2010 at 13:58 vote accept SBF
Dec 23, 2010 at 13:55 comment added SBF springerlink.com/content/0383j321m62n1u3t/fulltext.pdf Proposition 1
Dec 23, 2010 at 13:47 comment added user6096 @Gourtar: Could you provide a link or reference to the paper in question?
Dec 23, 2010 at 13:41 answer added user6096 timeline score: 6
Dec 23, 2010 at 8:49 comment added SBF Haha, have you mentioned that the definition of $R(T,A)$ does not coincide with the definition of $I_A(X_\tau)$. Of course you can say it's obvious that if two triangles have the same sides, they are equal - but maybe you remember that this simple fact also need to be proved.
Dec 22, 2010 at 19:21 comment added Omer That's an interesting way of phrasing this. Have you tried it for longer arguments?
Dec 22, 2010 at 18:52 comment added fedja What particular phrase do you have difficulty with when translating back into the formal language?
Dec 22, 2010 at 16:01 comment added SBF It's not a proof )
Dec 22, 2010 at 15:51 comment added fedja It says that if you blindfold someone moving at random and tell him when to stop and look, his chance to see a cow will be less than his chance to see it if he roams forever with open eyes but you can come close if you tell him to stop the first time you see a cow nearby or after a very long time whichever comes first. I doubt I can make it more obvious than that. The supremum can actually be taken over all stop-functions, but stopping times are enough to achieve it. As always, there are some measurability issues with continuous time, but, I guess, they are taken care of in the paper.
Dec 22, 2010 at 14:01 history asked SBF CC BY-SA 2.5