Jump to content

Talk:Total variation distance of probability measures

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Reference [1] http://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~sourav/Lecture2.pdf yields a 404 error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.156.32.168 (talk) 02:42, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Total variation distance of probability measures. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:38, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relation to L1

[edit]

"When the set is countable, the total variation distance is related to the" -> not only when the set is countable. This characterization (known as Scheffé's identity) also holds in the continuous setting (see. e.g., Theorem 5.1 of Combinatorial Methods in Density Estimation by Luc Devroye, Gabor Lugosi (2001). Clément Canonne (talk) 21:45, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Minus not showing

[edit]

For some reason, the minus sign inside the formula is not displayed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David cian (talkcontribs) 21:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Definition" not easy to understand

[edit]

The current definition is hard going. Anyone feel like recasting the definition in easy to understand text?

I think I understand the graph. Could we at least put that definition first? W102102 (talk) 18:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]