Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with measure-concentration
Search options not deleted
user 116734
7
votes
1
answer
940
views
Prove an anti-concentration inequality for a martingale
My problem can be described easily:
I have a sequence $(X_l)_{l \in \mathbb{N}}$ of r.v. adapted to some filtration $(\mathcal{F}_l)_{l \in \mathbb{N}}$, such that
$\left|X_{l+1}-X_l\right|\le R$ a …
- 63.9k