What is your argument to prove RHS to LHS?
What is your argument to prove RHS to LHS?
I don't have emotions and sometimes that makes me very sad.
It's a pretty long-winded algebraic exercise, basically I just just subbed in the expression for , then expanded out the transposes, after a lot of algebra I can get the LHS. Ofcourse I tried to backtrack from this and see if I could go from the LHS to the RHS, but there would be no way I could have thought of those algebraic manipulations if I were not given the RHS already haha
TrueTears (08-27-2013)
Well initially I wasn't given the RHS, but after I saw the solutions, I backtracked from the answer (which is the RHS), to the LHS (which is what I had initially), so yes I am wondering if there is a clearer method (in the sense that doesn't require me to backtrack from the answer itself).
What exactly was the question asking you to do then?
I don't have emotions and sometimes that makes me very sad.
It's part of a big overall problem, kinda hard to put it into context, but essentially I had to strictly go from the LHS to the RHS without knowing the expression of the RHS first.
Well without you even describing what the problem actually was I don't see how I can help you with any intuition for how to get there...
I don't have emotions and sometimes that makes me very sad.
TrueTears (08-27-2013)
Ok, I'll type it up now, please check this post soon.
Thanks for your help Dason.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok here it is:
My working out to derive p(β|σ,y) is:
The line marked with a blue dot is where I was stuck, only after I was told that the next step was the line marked in a red dot, then I knew what to do. As you can see, without knowing the step marked by the red dot, I couldn't have continued. So how can I get from the blue dot to the red dot without knowing the expression in the red dot
Last edited by TrueTears; 08-27-2013 at 11:33 AM.
Tweet |