The first part of this paper presents an economic theoreticalframework in which the reflexive relationship between observed conditions and theparticipants’ perceptions of them is an essential characteristic of the system. Withreflexivity at work at all times, Soros’ original insight is confirmed: standard economictheory is irrelevant regardless of whether or not reflexive interaction is giving rise to amajor boom and bust cycle.
And the here's the hook, finally.
The now widely searched conditions for the emergence of novelty cannot befound in logic alone. This is clear, for instance, in the pricing models of the Santa FeInstitute, which do incorporate recursive relationships but where a fundamental valueindependent of the valuation process still remains the norm from which market pricesdiverge.
I believe, though not entirely sure, that this refers to Arthur et al.'s work here: http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/ahlpt96.pdf.
In case that link disappears, the title is 'Asset Pricing Under Endogenous Expectations in an Artificial Stock Market'
The -da / -yo ending corresponds loosely to “it’s” in translation, but keep in mind that technically it is simply a marker ending the phrase as an adjectival statement.
Object particle I believe?
On the spending side, federal outlays rose 3% in the fiscal year, due to rising costs for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, as well as higher interest payments on the public debt and higher military spending.
Hmm, I'm going to guess Medic* will take cuts before the military does.
Starting in February, employers started using new withholding tables reflecting changes in the tax law, reducing the share of income withheld from workers’ paychecks. That decline partly offset the boost to tax revenue provided by rising wages and salaries, CBO said, resulting in just a 1% increase in withheld and payroll taxes.
Oh hey! Here we have companies paying employees more, so that answers the other question too.
About half of that decline occurred since June, CBO said, as companies became able to take advantage of a new, lower corporate tax rate and immediately deduct the full value of equipment purchases – changes implemented as part of the sweeping tax overhaul that was enacted in December.
Here's our answer to the above it seems. Good stuff, so then we're likely to have another 2-3 years in the tank under the current growth period per Blackrock.
Federal revenues were essentially flat in the budget year that just ended, despite stepped up economic growth, strong hiring and rising wages for workers, according to new estimates from the Congressional Budget Office that show the effects of last year’s tax law.
Okay so, there was a tax cut. However one way taxes would be recuperated is if wages went up but they largely haven't. We know that the average time since capital was bought is 23 years, 1995, so we should see investment there. If the case there is not, say for example that companies are cautious to be caught with there pants down and are expecting a recession soon, so despite the capacity to invest they dont. Suppose then that we have a recession brought on by this, or at least a sight downturn. Now prices are down and companies still have cash, interest rates (assumedly) go down so they spend there gains? I mean interest rates still seem pretty low at the moment. Is the small change really that big a deal for firms?
The alternative view is that, in the long run, financial markets will tend toward perfect knowledge, a sort of central planning -- by the Best Capital Allocating Robot -- that is better than Marxism because it is perfectly informed and ideally rational.
Is this possible though? Humans, at this cultural point, hate determinism.
In Fraser-Jenkins's taxonomy, all of these algorithms more or less count as "passive," because they all look at historical correlations to predict future returns, as opposed to an "active" style that attempts to predict future returns based on a fundamental analysis of real economic factors.
I mean this is what they're doing right now, but if I know this, then some quant somewhere also knows this, and recognizes the market opportunity therein. So you either look for markers not obviously given from a bunch of historical data or develop a whole new model for pricing things. Sounds a lot like VC.
Everything beyond is flows that we regard as "waste" flows in some sense (the fact that we do this should make you at least a little angry).
Reminds me of pg's insight on why nobody had created Stripe desite the need for something like it: that it would be a slog.
The focus of thispaper is on the optimization of stochastic objectives with high-dimensional parameters spaces.
This is perhaps the most important thing to remember about ADAM - use it when your data is high dimensional.
the leading cases are linear and monotone relationship.
This makes intuitive sense. As one goes does so should the other and vice versa. As one increases or decreases so should the other.
parameter does not mean variable
I know this one.
Instead of experience replay, weasynchronously execute multiple agents in parallel, on mul-tiple instances of the environment.
Analogous to the partial derivative, where we vary one thing and hold all other things constant?
Given a set of training examples, each marked as belonging to one or the other of two categories, an SVM training algorithm builds a model that assigns new examples to one category or the other
Hotdog or Not Hotdog?
Conceptually, underfitting is associated withe the inability of a machine learning algorithm to infer valid knowledge from the initial training data.
Trained on too much data or the learning algorithm isn't able to assume enough complexity to fit the data.
Given a sequence of terms, FindGeneratingFunction[a1, a2, ..., x] attempts to find a simple generating function in whose th coefficient is
How does that work??