Is there some reason this statement is supposed to be controversial or
false? It appears to derive rather straightforwardly from the
definition of the dual norm on a Banach space.
-Mike
Mike Battaglia <battaglia01@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is there some reason this statement is supposed to be
> controversial or false? It appears to derive rather
> straightforwardly from the definition of the dual norm on
> a Banach space.
It's interesting that optimizing the RMS of the
Tenney-limited prime errors seems to give the same result
as optimizing the minimax of the Tenney-weighted RMS-prime
errors. Could there be a way of proving it directly? A
pre-packaged theorem that already addresses this?
Graham
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Graham Breed <gbreed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It's interesting that optimizing the RMS of the
> Tenney-limited prime errors seems to give the same result
> as optimizing the minimax of the Tenney-weighted RMS-prime
> errors.
What's "Tenney-weighted RMS-prime error?" You mean the minimax of the
TE norm-weighted error for all intervals?
-Mike