DOCSLIB.ORG

Homework Assignment 3: Solutions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Homework Assignment 3: Solutions 1 Homework Assignment 3: Solutions ENEE646 Problem 1.1(a): 1 Throughput of a single processor = 10×10−3 = 100 transactions/sec 1000 Desired capacity gain = 100 = 10 p Using the formula: Capacity gain = 1+b(p−1) , we have 120 10 = 1 + b(120 − 1) 11 11 which gives b = 119 . Thus each extra processor processor must work 10 + 10 × 119 = 10.924 millisec- onds/transaction. Problem 1.1(b): As the number of processors remains the same, we can increase capacity by making each extra processor to do lesser additional work per transaction. Suppose each extra processor must do a fraction b additional work, then we require 120 1800 Capacity gain = ≥ 1 + 119b 100 thus b ≤ 1/21. Thus if each extra processor takes ≤ 10 + 10/21 = 10.48 milliseconds/transaction, the required capacity is achieved. Problem 1.2(a): Suppose there are three workloads W1, W2, W3 requiring 10, 60 and 120 operations respectively and the throughputs of the three processors A, B and C for these workloads is given in following table: Throughputs (operation/sec) Processor workload-1 workload-2 workload-3 A 10 20 30 B 20 30 10 C 30 10 20 Suppose each vendor compares the performance of their system with others by taking the arithmetic mean of normalized throughputs then following results are obtained 1 10 20 30 A w.r.t B = + + ≈ 1.4 3 20 30 10 1 10 20 30 A w.r.t C = + + ≈ 1.3 3 30 10 20 1 20 30 10 B w.r.t A = + + ≈ 1.3 3 10 20 30 1 20 30 10 B w.r.t C = + + ≈ 1.4 3 30 10 20 1 30 10 20 C w.r.t A = + + ≈ 1.4 3 10 20 30 2 1 30 10 20 C w.r.t B = + + ≈ 1.3 3 20 30 10 Thus using the arithmetic mean of normalized throughputs as performance measure for the above workload all the vendors can claim that their product is the best. If we take the weighted harmonic mean of throughputs as performance measure, we get following results: weighted harmonic mean of throughputs for processor A: 1 10 60 120 = 23.75 operations/sec 190×10 + 190×20 + 190×30 weighted harmonic mean of throughputs for processor B: 1 10 60 120 ≈ 13.1 operations/sec 190×20 + 190×30 + 190×10 weighted harmonic mean of throughputs for processor C: 1 10 60 120 ≈ 15.4 operations/sec 190×30 + 190×10 + 190×20 Thus using weighted harmonic mean of throughputs as performance measure we find that the processor of vendor A is best. Problem 1.3: Suppose for n workloads of m1, m2, ··· , mn instructions, throughputs of processor A are r1, r2, ··· rn respectively and throughputs of processor b are s1, s2, ··· , sn respectively. Then the weighted geometric mean of throughput ratios A/B can be defined as: n mi m +m +···+m Y ri 1 2 n s i=1 i This performance measure will always show one of the systems better than the other because: mi m +m +···+m weighted geometric mean of throughput ratios B/A = Qn si 1 2 n = 1/(weighted geometric i=1 ri mean of throughput ratios A/B) We can define weighted arithmetic mean of throughput ratios A/B as: n X ri w ∗ i s i=1 i where wi = mi/(m1 + m2 + ··· + mn). This is not a good measure to compare throughput ratios of two systems as their is no relation between “weighted arithmetic mean of throughput ratios A/B” and “weighted arithmetic mean of throughput ratios B/A”. Thus, it will not consistently show one system better than the other. Problem 1.4: When all the workloads are the same, harmonic mean of throughputs gives the exact value of average throughput. For example, suppose there are n workloads each requiring m operations and suppose the 3 throughputs for a processor for these workloads are m/t1, m/t2, ··· , m/tn respectively. Then the harmonic mean of the throughput is nm t1 + t2 + ··· + tn which is actually the average throughput. If we use arithmetic mean we will not get the correct value of average throughput. Similarly if the workloads require different number of operations (suppose m1, m2, ··· , mn) then weighted harmonic mean of the throughputs gives the average throughput which is: m1 + m2 + ··· + mn t1 + t2 + ··· + tn Thus whenever we need to average some kind of rates, harmonic mean is the best. Harmonic mean is not effective when we compare speedups. Consider two processors A and B which perform two workloads each requiring 100 operations. Suppose A has a throughput of 10 operations/sec for workload-1 and 20 operations/sec for workload-2 and B has a throughput of 20 operations/sec for workload-1 and 10 operations/sec for workload-2. The harmonic mean of speedups (A/B) is: 1 1 20 10 = 0.8 2 10 + 20 The harmonic mean of speedups (B/A) is: 1 1 10 20 = 0.8 2 20 + 10 Thus the harmonic mean suggests that either of the two processors is worse than the other, which is wrong. Performance of one of the processors has to be either same or better than the other, i.e. one of the average speedups should be ≥ 1, which is not true if take harmonic mean in this example. If we take geometric mean of speedups, we find that the two processors are equivalent, i.e., geometric mean of speedups is 1. Thus the harmonic mean is not suitable for calculating average speedup..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Comparison of Harmonic, Geometric and Arithmetic Means for Change Detection in SAR Time Series Guillaume Quin, Béatrice Pinel-Puysségur, Jean-Marie Nicolas
    Comparison of Harmonic, Geometric and Arithmetic means for change detection in SAR time series Guillaume Quin, Béatrice Pinel-Puysségur, Jean-Marie Nicolas To cite this version: Guillaume Quin, Béatrice Pinel-Puysségur, Jean-Marie Nicolas. Comparison of Harmonic, Geometric and Arithmetic means for change detection in SAR time series. EUSAR. 9th European Conference on Synthetic Aperture Radar, 2012., Apr 2012, Germany. hal-00737524 HAL Id: hal-00737524 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00737524 Submitted on 2 Oct 2012 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. EUSAR 2012 Comparison of Harmonic, Geometric and Arithmetic Means for Change Detection in SAR Time Series Guillaume Quin CEA, DAM, DIF, F-91297 Arpajon, France Béatrice Pinel-Puysségur CEA, DAM, DIF, F-91297 Arpajon, France Jean-Marie Nicolas Telecom ParisTech, CNRS LTCI, 75634 Paris Cedex 13, France Abstract The amplitude distribution in a SAR image can present a heavy tail. Indeed, very high–valued outliers can be observed. In this paper, we propose the usage of the Harmonic, Geometric and Arithmetic temporal means for amplitude statistical studies along time. In general, the arithmetic mean is used to compute the mean amplitude of time series.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Analysis in Astronomy and Physics
    Data Analysis in Astronomy and Physics Lecture 3: Statistics 2 Lecture_Note_3_Statistics_new.nb M. Röllig - SS19 Lecture_Note_3_Statistics_new.nb 3 Statistics Statistics are designed to summarize, reduce or describe data. A statistic is a function of the data alone! Example statistics for a set of data X1,X 2, … are: average, the maximum value, average of the squares,... Statistics are combinations of finite amounts of data. Example summarizing examples of statistics: location and scatter. 4 Lecture_Note_3_Statistics_new.nb Location Average (Arithmetic Mean) Out[ ]//TraditionalForm= N ∑Xi i=1 X N Example: Mean[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}] Mean[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8}] Mean[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 100}] 4 9 2 16 Lecture_Note_3_Statistics_new.nb 5 Location Weighted Average (Weighted Arithmetic Mean) 1 "N" In[36]:= equationXw ⩵ wi Xi "N" = ∑ wi i 1 i=1 Out[36]//TraditionalForm= N ∑wi Xi i=1 Xw N ∑wi i=1 1 1 1 1 In case of equal weights wi = w : Xw = ∑wi Xi = ∑wXi = w ∑Xi = ∑Xi = X ∑wi ∑w w N 1 N Example: data: xi, weights :w i = xi In[46]:= x1={1., 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}; w1=1/ x1; x2={1., 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8}; w2=1 x2; x3={1., 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 100}; w3=1 x3; In[49]:= x1.w1 Total[w1] x2.w2 Total[w2] x3.w3 Total[w3] Out[49]= 2.69972 Out[50]= 2.9435 Out[51]= 3.07355 6 Lecture_Note_3_Statistics_new.nb Location Median Arrange Xi according to size and renumber.
    [Show full text]
  • Simple Mean Weighted Mean Or Harmonic Mean
    MultiplyMultiply oror Divide?Divide? AA BestBest PracticePractice forfor FactorFactor AnalysisAnalysis 77 ––10 10 JuneJune 20112011 Dr.Dr. ShuShu-Ping-Ping HuHu AlfredAlfred SmithSmith CCEACCEA Los Angeles Washington, D.C. Boston Chantilly Huntsville Dayton Santa Barbara Albuquerque Colorado Springs Ft. Meade Ft. Monmouth Goddard Space Flight Center Ogden Patuxent River Silver Spring Washington Navy Yard Cleveland Dahlgren Denver Johnson Space Center Montgomery New Orleans Oklahoma City Tampa Tacoma Vandenberg AFB Warner Robins ALC Presented at the 2011 ISPA/SCEA Joint Annual Conference and Training Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com PRT-70, 01 Apr 2011 ObjectivesObjectives It is common to estimate hours as a simple factor of a technical parameter such as weight, aperture, power or source lines of code (SLOC), i.e., hours = a*TechParameter z “Software development hours = a * SLOC” is used as an example z Concept is applicable to any factor cost estimating relationship (CER) Our objective is to address how to best estimate “a” z Multiply SLOC by Hour/SLOC or Divide SLOC by SLOC/Hour? z Simple, weighted, or harmonic mean? z Role of regression analysis z Base uncertainty on the prediction interval rather than just the range Our goal is to provide analysts a better understanding of choices available and how to select the right approach Presented at the 2011 ISPA/SCEA Joint Annual Conference and Training Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com PR-70, 01 Apr 2011 Approved for Public Release 2 of 25 OutlineOutline Definitions
    [Show full text]
  • The Generalized Likelihood Uncertainty Estimation Methodology
    CHAPTER 4 The Generalized Likelihood Uncertainty Estimation methodology Calibration and uncertainty estimation based upon a statistical framework is aimed at finding an optimal set of models, parameters and variables capable of simulating a given system. There are many possible sources of mismatch between observed and simulated state variables (see section 3.2). Some of the sources of uncertainty originate from physical randomness, and others from uncertain knowledge put into the system. The uncertainties originating from physical randomness may be treated within a statistical framework, whereas alternative methods may be needed to account for uncertainties originating from the interpretation of incomplete and perhaps ambiguous data sets. The GLUE methodology (Beven and Binley 1992) rejects the idea of one single optimal solution and adopts the concept of equifinality of models, parameters and variables (Beven and Binley 1992; Beven 1993). Equifinality originates from the imperfect knowledge of the system under consideration, and many sets of models, parameters and variables may therefore be considered equal or almost equal simulators of the system. Using the GLUE analysis, the prior set of mod- els, parameters and variables is divided into a set of non-acceptable solutions and a set of acceptable solutions. The GLUE methodology deals with the variable degree of membership of the sets. The degree of membership is determined by assessing the extent to which solutions fit the model, which in turn is determined 53 CHAPTER 4. THE GENERALIZED LIKELIHOOD UNCERTAINTY ESTIMATION METHODOLOGY by subjective likelihood functions. By abandoning the statistical framework we also abandon the traditional definition of uncertainty and in general will have to accept that to some extent uncertainty is a matter of subjective and individual interpretation by the hydrologist.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 3: Measure of Central Tendency
    Lecture 3: Measure of Central Tendency Donglei Du ([email protected]) Faculty of Business Administration, University of New Brunswick, NB Canada Fredericton E3B 9Y2 Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 1 / 53 Table of contents 1 Measure of central tendency: location parameter Introduction Arithmetic Mean Weighted Mean (WM) Median Mode Geometric Mean Mean for grouped data The Median for Grouped Data The Mode for Grouped Data 2 Dicussion: How to lie with averges? Or how to defend yourselves from those lying with averages? Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 2 / 53 Section 1 Measure of central tendency: location parameter Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 3 / 53 Subsection 1 Introduction Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 4 / 53 Introduction Characterize the average or typical behavior of the data. There are many types of central tendency measures: Arithmetic mean Weighted arithmetic mean Geometric mean Median Mode Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 5 / 53 Subsection 2 Arithmetic Mean Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 6 / 53 Arithmetic Mean The Arithmetic Mean of a set of n numbers x + ::: + x AM = 1 n n Arithmetic Mean for population and sample N P xi µ = i=1 N n P xi x¯ = i=1 n Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 7 / 53 Example Example: A sample of five executives received the following bonuses last year ($000): 14.0 15.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 Problem: Determine the average bonus given last year. Solution: 14 + 15 + 17 + 16 + 15 77 x¯ = = = 15:4: 5 5 Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 8 / 53 Example Example: the weight example (weight.csv) The R code: weight <- read.csv("weight.csv") sec_01A<-weight$Weight.01A.2013Fall # Mean mean(sec_01A) ## [1] 155.8548 Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 9 / 53 Will Rogers phenomenon Consider two sets of IQ scores of famous people.
    [Show full text]
  • “Mean”? a Review of Interpreting and Calculating Different Types of Means and Standard Deviations
    pharmaceutics Review What Does It “Mean”? A Review of Interpreting and Calculating Different Types of Means and Standard Deviations Marilyn N. Martinez 1,* and Mary J. Bartholomew 2 1 Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation, Center for Veterinary Medicine, US FDA, Rockville, MD 20855, USA 2 Office of Surveillance and Compliance, Center for Veterinary Medicine, US FDA, Rockville, MD 20855, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-240-3-402-0635 Academic Editors: Arlene McDowell and Neal Davies Received: 17 January 2017; Accepted: 5 April 2017; Published: 13 April 2017 Abstract: Typically, investigations are conducted with the goal of generating inferences about a population (humans or animal). Since it is not feasible to evaluate the entire population, the study is conducted using a randomly selected subset of that population. With the goal of using the results generated from that sample to provide inferences about the true population, it is important to consider the properties of the population distribution and how well they are represented by the sample (the subset of values). Consistent with that study objective, it is necessary to identify and use the most appropriate set of summary statistics to describe the study results. Inherent in that choice is the need to identify the specific question being asked and the assumptions associated with the data analysis. The estimate of a “mean” value is an example of a summary statistic that is sometimes reported without adequate consideration as to its implications or the underlying assumptions associated with the data being evaluated. When ignoring these critical considerations, the method of calculating the variance may be inconsistent with the type of mean being reported.
    [Show full text]
  • Harmonic Means ‰ Mean of a Ratio ‰ Summarizing Variability: Range, Variance, Percentiles, Quartiles ‰ Determining Distribution of Data: Quantile-Quantile Plots
    SummarizingSummarizing MeasuredMeasured DataData ©2010 Raj Jain www.rajjain.com 12-1 OverviewOverview Basic Probability and Statistics Concepts: CDF, PDF, PMF, Mean, Variance, CoV, Normal Distribution Summarizing Data by a Single Number: Mean, Median, and Mode, Arithmetic, Geometric, Harmonic Means Mean of A Ratio Summarizing Variability: Range, Variance, percentiles, Quartiles Determining Distribution of Data: Quantile-Quantile plots ©2010 Raj Jain www.rajjain.com 12-2 PartPart III:III: ProbabilityProbability TheoryTheory andand StatisticsStatistics 1. How to report the performance as a single number? Is specifying the mean the correct way? 2. How to report the variability of measured quantities? What are the alternatives to variance and when are they appropriate? 3. How to interpret the variability? How much confidence can you put on data with a large variability? 4. How many measurements are required to get a desired level of statistical confidence? 5. How to summarize the results of several different workloads on a single computer system? 6. How to compare two or more computer systems using several different workloads? Is comparing the mean sufficient? 7. What model best describes the relationship between two variables? Also, how good is the model? ©2010 Raj Jain www.rajjain.com 12-3 BasicBasic ProbabilityProbability andand StatisticsStatistics ConceptsConcepts Independent Events: Two events are called independent if the occurrence of one event does not in any way affect the probability of the other event. Random Variable:
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on Calculating Computer Performance
    Notes on Calculating Computer Performance Bruce Jacob and Trevor Mudge Advanced Computer Architecture Lab EECS Department, University of Michigan {blj,tnm}@umich.edu Abstract This report explains what it means to characterize the performance of a computer, and which methods are appro- priate and inappropriate for the task. The most widely used metric is the performance on the SPEC benchmark suite of programs; currently, the results of running the SPEC benchmark suite are compiled into a single number using the geometric mean. The primary reason for using the geometric mean is that it preserves values across normalization, but unfortunately, it does not preserve total run time, which is probably the figure of greatest interest when performances are being compared. Cycles per Instruction (CPI) is another widely used metric, but this method is invalid, even if comparing machines with identical clock speeds. Comparing CPI values to judge performance falls prey to the same prob- lems as averaging normalized values. In general, normalized values must not be averaged and instead of the geometric mean, either the harmonic or the arithmetic mean is the appropriate method for averaging a set running times. The arithmetic mean should be used to average times, and the harmonic mean should be used to average rates (1/time). A number of published SPECmarks are recomputed using these means to demonstrate the effect of choosing a favorable algorithm. 1.0 Performance and the Use of Means We want to summarize the performance of a computer; the easiest way uses a single number that can be compared against the numbers of other machines.
    [Show full text]
  • Experimental and Simulation Studies of the Shape and Motion of an Air Bubble Contained in a Highly Viscous Liquid Flowing Through an Orifice Constriction
    Accepted Manuscript Experimental and simulation studies of the shape and motion of an air bubble contained in a highly viscous liquid flowing through an orifice constriction B. Hallmark, C.-H. Chen, J.F. Davidson PII: S0009-2509(19)30414-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2019.04.043 Reference: CES 14954 To appear in: Chemical Engineering Science Received Date: 13 February 2019 Revised Date: 25 April 2019 Accepted Date: 27 April 2019 Please cite this article as: B. Hallmark, C.-H. Chen, J.F. Davidson, Experimental and simulation studies of the shape and motion of an air bubble contained in a highly viscous liquid flowing through an orifice constriction, Chemical Engineering Science (2019), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2019.04.043 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. Experimental and simulation studies of the shape and motion of an air bubble contained in a highly viscous liquid flowing through an orifice constriction. B. Hallmark, C.-H. Chen, J.F. Davidson Department of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, Philippa Fawcett Drive, Cambridge. CB3 0AS. UK Abstract This paper reports an experimental and computational study on the shape and motion of an air bubble, contained in a highly viscous Newtonian liquid, as it passes through a rectangular channel having a constriction orifice.
    [Show full text]
  • Prevalence of Elevated Blood Pressure Levels In
    PREVALENCE OF ELEVATED BLOOD PRESSURE LEVELS IN OVERWEIGHT AND OBESE YOUNG POPULATION (2 – 19 YEARS) IN THE UNITED STATES BETWEEN 2011 AND 2012 By: Lawrence O. Agyekum A Dissertation Submitted to Faculty of the School of Health Related Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Biomedical Informatics Department of Health Informatics Spring 2015 © 2015 Lawrence Agyekum All Rights Reserved Final Dissertation Approval Form PREVALENCE OF ELEVATED BLOOD PRESSURE LEVELS IN OVERWEIGHT AND OBESE YOUNG POPULATION (2 – 19 YEARS) IN THE UNITED STATES BETWEEN 2011 AND 2012 BY Lawrence O. Agyekum Dissertation Committee: Syed Haque, Ph.D., Committee Chair Frederick Coffman Ph.D., Committee Member Shankar Srinivasan, Ph.D., Member Approved by the Dissertation Committee: _____________________________________ Date: _______________ _____________________________________ Date: _______________ ____________________________________ Date: _______________ ii ABSTRACT Prevalence of Elevated Blood Pressure Levels in Overweight and Obese Young Population (2 -19 Years) in the United States between 2011-2012 By Lawrence Ofori Agyekum Several studies have reported hypertension prevalence in children and adolescents in the United States (US) using regional or local population-based samples but few have reported national prevalence. The present study estimates national hypertension prevalence in US children and adolescents for 2011-2012. A convenient sample size of 4,196 (population aged ≤ 19) representing 43% of 9,756 (total survey respondents) was selected and stratified by age groups; “Children” and “Adolescents” using the 2007 Joint National Committee recommended definitions. Next, hypertension distribution was explained by gender, race, age, body weight, standing height and blood serum total cholesterol.
    [Show full text]
  • Package 'Cumstats'
    Package ‘cumstats’ January 16, 2017 Type Package Title Cumulative Descriptive Statistics Version 1.0 Date 2017-01-13 Author Arturo Erdely and Ian Castillo Maintainer Arturo Erdely <[email protected]> Description Cumulative descriptive statistics for (arithmetic, geometric, harmonic) mean, me- dian, mode, variance, skewness and kurtosis. License GPL-3 NeedsCompilation no Repository CRAN Date/Publication 2017-01-16 08:13:00 R topics documented: cumstats-package . .2 cumgmean . .3 cumhmean . .4 cumkurt . .5 cummean . .6 cummedian . .7 cummode . .8 cumquant . .9 cumskew . 10 cumvar . 11 kurtosis . 11 Mode ............................................ 12 skewness . 13 Index 15 1 2 cumstats-package cumstats-package Cumulative Descriptive Statistics Description Cumulative descriptive statistics for (arithmetic, geometric, harmonic) mean, median, mode, vari- ance, skewness and kurtosis. Details The DESCRIPTION file: Package: cumstats Type: Package Title: Cumulative Descriptive Statistics Version: 1.0 Date: 2017-01-13 Author: Arturo Erdely and Ian Castillo Maintainer: Arturo Erdely <[email protected]> Description: Cumulative descriptive statistics for (arithmetic, geometric, harmonic) mean, median, mode, variance, skewness and kurtosis. License: GPL-3 Index of help topics: Mode Statistical Mode cumgmean Cumulative Geometric Mean cumhmean Cumulative Harmonic Mean cumkurt Cumulative Kurtosis cummean Cumulative Arithmetic Mean cummedian Cumulative Median cummode Cumulative Mode cumquant Cumulative Quantile cumskew Cumulative Skewness cumstats-package Cumulative Descriptive Statistics cumvar Cumulative Variance kurtosis Pearson's Measure of Kurtosis skewness Skewness Cumulative descriptive statistics for (arithmetic, geometric, harmonic) mean, median, mode, vari- ance, skewness and kurtosis. Author(s) Arturo Erdely and Ian Castillo Maintainer: Arturo Erdely <[email protected]> cumgmean 3 cumgmean Cumulative Geometric Mean Description Returns a vector whose elements are the cumulative geometric mean of the elements of the argu- ment.
    [Show full text]
  • [Math.PR] 3 Dec 2001 Nsm Eali Eto .;Hr Ewl Utrcl H Essentials
    HARMONIC MEAN, RANDOM POLYNOMIALS AND STOCHASTIC MATRICES NATALIA L. KOMAROVA AND IGOR RIVIN Abstract. Motivated by a problem in learning theory, we are led to study the dominant eigenvalue of a class of random matrices. This turns out to be related to the roots of the derivative of random polynomials (generated by picking their roots uniformly at random in the interval [0, 1], although our results extend to other distribu- tions). This, in turn, requires the study of the statistical behavior of the harmonic mean of random variables as above, and that, in turn, leads us to delicate question of the rate of convergence to stable laws and tail estimates for stable laws. Introduction The original motivation for the work in this paper was provided by the first-named author’s research in learning theory, specifically in various models of language acquisition (see [KNN2001, NKN2001, KN2001]) and more specifically yet by the analysis of the speed of con- vergence of the memoryless learner algorithm. The setup is described in some detail in Section 4.1; here we will just recall the essentials. There is a collection of concepts R1,...,Rn and words which refer to these concepts, sometimes ambiguously. The teacher generates a stream of words, referring to the concept R1. This is not known to the student, but he must learn by, at each steps, guessing some concept Ri and checking for consistency with the teacher’s input. The mem- oryless learner algorithm consists of picking a concept Ri at random, arXiv:math/0105236v2 [math.PR] 3 Dec 2001 and sticking by this choice, until it is proven wrong.
    [Show full text]