Recent content by Portella

Ok. If that is right, now I have the tools to understand the proof. Thank you very much!

First of all, I would like to thank you, haruspex and Andrew, for your patience. I could follow Andrew's reformulation and, as I understand it, it seems precise. Well, to understand a precise description is easier than to formulate it and I know I wasn't able to do it well when trying to shortly...

P\ [\sup\limits_{H}\ |Ein(h)\ -\ E'in(h)|\ >\ \epsilon\ |\ S] and \sup\limits_{H}\ P\ [\ |Ein(h)\ -\ E'in(h)|\ >\ \epsilon\ |\ S] I have commited an error when changing the expression. Yes, it is a measure of error. The whole proof has as a goal to transform Hoeffding's inequality in...

Thanks haruspex for your patience. This is why I think I'm making some conceptual confusion. My source was a machine learning book which is used as source for an online course. I have changed some terms because it would be confusing to transcribe them literally and the proof is too long to...

I used capital X under the supremum, but didn't know if I should do it inside the function, since the notation I'm used to is to use capital letters to represent the whole set only. I will try to make it clearer: P\ [\sup\limits_{X}\ |f(X)\ -\ f'(X)|\ >\ 5] and \sup\limits_{X}\ P\ [\...

P\ [\sup\limits_{X}\ |f(x)\ -\ f'(x)|\ >\ y] and \sup\limits_{X}\ P\ [\ |f(x)\ -\ f'(x)|\ >\ y] I'm sorry. That's the first time I'm posting here and the first time I'm using Latex. I'm still getting used to it. I've got rid of z and consider y a constant; f and f' are two different...

I'm trying to deal with the supremum concept in a specific situation, but I think I'm getting the concept wrong. A step of a proof I'm going through states: P\ [\sup\limits_{x}\ |f(x)\ -\ f'(x)|\ >\ y\ |\ z]\ \ \leq\ \ \sum_{i=1}^M\ P\ [\ |f(x)\ -\ f'(x)|\ >\ y\ |\ z]\ \ \leq\ \ M\times\...