[ Prev ]
2017-11-29

-- Nov 28 In-Class Exercise
Name: Ishan Shinde
For d=0 possible values of lambda={0,50,100}
For d=1 possible values of lambda={0,25,50}
For d=2 possible values of lambda={12,25,37}
Choose 25
Name: Ishan Shinde For d=0 possible values of lambda={0,50,100} For d=1 possible values of lambda={0,25,50} For d=2 possible values of lambda={12,25,37} Choose 25

-- Nov 28 In-Class Exercise
n=100, k=3, d=3. For d=0, possible lamda values are {0,50,100}. For d=1, possible lamda values are {0,25,50}. For d=2, lamda values are {12,25,37}. Therefore, 25 is selected.
n=100, k=3, d=3. For d=0, possible lamda values are {0,50,100}. For d=1, possible lamda values are {0,25,50}. For d=2, lamda values are {12,25,37}. Therefore, 25 is selected.

-- Nov 28 In-Class Exercise
Range of n: [0, 100] Assuming uniform spacing is used, For d=1, we would divide range into k=3 parts as: [0, 50, 100] We can expect that 0 would give better result than other two, since it is closer to the optimal value (21) For d=2, we would explore the interval around 0. Since left part is out of range, we only consider the right part, and divide it into k=3 parts as: [0 25 50] We can expect that 25 would give better result than other two, since it is closer to the optimal value (21) For d=3, we would explore the interval around 25, and divide it into k=3 parts as: [13, 25, 37] We can again expect that 25 would give better result than other two, since it is closer to the optimal value (21) Since max depth is reached, search would be stopped. The predicted optimal value would be 25.
(Edited: 2017-11-30)
<nowiki>Range of n: [0, 100] Assuming uniform spacing is used, For d=1, we would divide range into k=3 parts as: [0, 50, 100] We can expect that 0 would give better result than other two, since it is closer to the optimal value (21) For d=2, we would explore the interval around 0. Since left part is out of range, we only consider the right part, and divide it into k=3 parts as: [0 25 50] We can expect that 25 would give better result than other two, since it is closer to the optimal value (21) For d=3, we would explore the interval around 25, and divide it into k=3 parts as: [13, 25, 37] We can again expect that 25 would give better result than other two, since it is closer to the optimal value (21) Since max depth is reached, search would be stopped. The predicted optimal value would be 25.</nowiki>
2017-12-01

-- Nov 28 In-Class Exercise
Given Range : 0 -100 For, d=-0: let `lambda` values be [0 50 100] and 0 is taken as optimal d=1: let `lambda` values be [0 25 50] and 25 is taken as optimal. Now, for d=3, `lambda` range be [12.5 25 37.5] and 25 is taken as optimal.
Given Range : 0 -100 For, d=-0: let @BT@lambda@BT@ values be [0 50 100] and 0 is taken as optimal d=1: let @BT@lambda@BT@ values be [0 25 50] and 25 is taken as optimal. Now, for d=3, @BT@lambda@BT@ range be [12.5 25 37.5] and 25 is taken as optimal.
2017-12-03

-- Nov 28 In-Class Exercise
range = 100
d=1, let lambda have values 0, 50, 100 d=2, let lambda have values 16, 33, 50 d=3, let lambda have values 16, 24.5, 33
24.5 is optimal
range = 100 d=1, let lambda have values 0, 50, 100 d=2, let lambda have values 16, 33, 50 d=3, let lambda have values 16, 24.5, 33 24.5 is optimal
2017-12-14

-- Nov 28 In-Class Exercise
l = 100 h1 = [0, 50, 100] h2 = [16, 33, 50] h3 = [16, 24.5, 33]
l = 100 h1 = [0, 50, 100] h2 = [16, 33, 50] h3 = [16, 24.5, 33]
2017-12-15

-- Nov 28 In-Class Exercise
n= 100 k=3 d=3 lamda=21
(0,50,100} 0 is chosen
{0,25,50} 25 is chosen
{12.5,25,37.5}
25 is chosen at depth 3
(Edited: 2017-12-15)
n= 100 k=3 d=3 lamda=21 (0,50,100} 0 is chosen {0,25,50} 25 is chosen {12.5,25,37.5} 25 is chosen at depth 3
X