f 1 (f 1 ; h 2 S 2 + m 2 f 1 ; h 3 S 2 + m 3 f 1 ; h 4 S 2 + m 4 f 1 ) = S 2 f 1 ( 1 ; 2 ; 3 ; 4 ). (31)Therefore, exp<strong>and</strong>ing the right side of equality (31) into a Taylor series, we haveS 4 f 1 (0; h 2 ; h 3 , h 4 ) + S 2 ∂f1f 1 ( 1 ; 2 ; 3 ; 4 )[h 2 (1; m 2 ; m 3 ; m 4 ) +∂α2∂f1∂f1h 3 + h 4 ] + f 2 1 ( 1 , 2 ; 3 , 4 )f 1 (1; m 2 ; m 3 ; m 4 ) = S 2 f 1 ( 1 ; 2 , 3 , 4 ). (31)∂α3∂α4Hence we conclude that either f 1 /S 2 = M, where M can be a function of 3 <strong>and</strong> 4 , or thecoefficients of S 4 , S 2 f 1 <strong>and</strong> f 2 1 are zeros. But the first supposition can only be realized if M is aconstant <strong>and</strong> in that case the Theorem would have been already proved. It remains thereforeto consider the second case in whichf 1 (0; h 2 , h 3 , h 4 ) = 0, f 1 (1; m 2 ; m 3 ; m 4 ) = 0, (32)∂f1∂f1∂f1h 2 (1; m 2 , m 3 , m 4 ) + h 3 (1; m 2 , m 3 , m 4 ) + h 4 (1, m 2 , m 3 , m 4 ) = 1.∂α2∂α3∂α4Supposing now that 1 ( 1 ; 2 ; 3 , 4 ) = f 1 – 1 S,we conclude that this function vanishes at all the values of its arguments connected by theequalities[( 2 – m 2 1 )/h 2 ] = [( 3 – m 3 1 )/h 3 ] = [( 4 – m 4 1 )/h 4 ] = p (33)with any p because 1 (0; h 2 , h 3 , h 4 ) = 0, 1 (1; m 2 ; m 3 ; m 4 ) = 0, (34)∂ψ1∂ψ1∂ψ1h 2 (1; m 2 , m 3 ; m 4 ) + h 3 + h 4 = 0.∂α2∂α3∂α4We also note that the equalities (33) are equivalent to equationsh i S + m i 1 – i = 0, i = 2, 3, 4 (35)only two of which are independent because of (30).For visualizing the obtained result more clearly we can replace the homogeneouscoordinates by Cartesian coordinates supposing that for example 3 = 1. Then we may saythat the surface of the second order 1 (x; y; 1; z) = 0 passes through the line of intersection ofthe surfaces expressed by the equations (35). But, supposing now that 2 = f 2 – 2 S = h 2 S 2 + m 2 f 1 – 2 S = m 2 1 + S(h 2 S + m 2 $ 1 – 2 ), i = f i – i S = m i 1 + S(h i S + m i 1 – i ), i = 3, 4we conclude that the surfaces 2 = 0, 3 = 0, 4 = 0 also pass through the same line. Inaddition, the form of the functions 2 , 3 , 4 shows that these equations cannot admit of anyother positive common solutions excepting those given by equations (35). Consequently,noting that, for
f i = i S + i , i = 1, 2, 3, 4, (36)all the stationary solutions are determined by the common solution of equations (27), weconclude that all these solutions are determined by formulas (35) with the parameter k = 4 / 3taking all possible values from 0 to .There thus exist such positive values 4 / 3 that the other coordinates 1 / 3 <strong>and</strong> 2 / 3 determined by the equations (35) are also positive. Therefore, by continuously varyingthe parameter we can make at least one coordinate (for example, 4 / 3 ) vanish with the otherones being non-negative. Then, with 1 , 2 , 3 taking the respective positive values <strong>and</strong>replacing 4 by zero, we note that (36.4) vanishes which is impossible because all thecoefficients there are positive.Let us now pass on to the general case <strong>and</strong> show by the same method that if the Theoremis valid for some n it holds for (n + 1). Indeed, if it is valid for n, the equations (36) with i =1, 2, …, n cannot include dependent equations 1 = 0, 2 = 0, …, n – 1 = 0when all the coefficients in f i are positive. Therefore, the similar equations 1 = 0, 2 = 0, …, n = 0,where f i are the same as in (36) but with i = 1, 2, …, (n + 1), cannot be connected by morethan one dependence; i.e., the stationarity condition for (n + 1) classes cannot depend onmore than one parameter.Consequently, the requirement thatkf n – f n+1 = 0,if only it does not hold identically for some k, leads to a restricted number of possible valuesfor f 1 , f 2 , …, f n , f n+1 . Therefore, uniting the n-th <strong>and</strong> the (n + 1)-th classes into one, <strong>and</strong>assuming that in the initial distribution n = /(1 + k), n+1 = k/(1 + k),the functions i = f i [ 1 ; 2 ; …; /(1 + k); k/(1 + k)], i = 1, 2, …, n – 1, n = f n [ 1 ; 2 ; …; /(1 + k); k/(1 + k)] +f n+1 [ 1 ; 2 ; …; /(1 + k); k/(1 + k)]if onlyF k = kf n [ 1 ; 2 ; …; /(1 + k); k/(1 + k)] –f n+1 [ 1 ; 2 ; …; /(1 + k); k/(1 + k)] = 0 (37)can take only a restricted number of values, <strong>and</strong>, owing to their continuity, have only onedefinite system of values 15 . It follows that if{the left side of} equation (37) is not an exactsquare, then i = i ( 1 + … + n–1 + ) 2 + µ i F k , i = 1, 2, …, n. (38)
- Page 3: of All Countries and to the Entire
- Page 6 and 7: (Coll. Works), vol. 4. N.p., 1964,
- Page 8 and 9: individuals of the third class, the
- Page 10: From the theoretical point of view
- Page 13 and 14: Second case: Each crossing can repr
- Page 15: On the other hand, for four classes
- Page 19 and 20: f 1 = C 1 P(f 1 ; …; f n+1 ), C 1
- Page 21 and 22: ut in this case f = 2 , f 1 = 2 ,
- Page 23 and 24: I also note the essential differenc
- Page 25 and 26: A 1 23n1 + 1 A 1 A 1 … A 11A 2 A
- Page 27 and 28: coefficient of 2 in the right side
- Page 29 and 30: h(A r h - c h A r 0 ) = - A r0we tr
- Page 31 and 32: Notes1. Our formulas obviously pres
- Page 33 and 34: Bernstein’s standpoint regarding
- Page 35 and 36: Corollary 1.8. A true proposition c
- Page 37 and 38: It is important to indicate that al
- Page 39 and 40: ut for the simultaneous realization
- Page 41 and 42: devoid of quadratic divisors and re
- Page 43 and 44: propositions (B i and C j ) can be
- Page 45 and 46: A ~ A 1 and B = B 1 , we will have
- Page 47 and 48: included in a given totality as equ
- Page 49 and 50: For unconnected totalities we would
- Page 51 and 52: proposition given that a second one
- Page 53 and 54: On the other hand, let x be a parti
- Page 55 and 56: totality is perfect, but that the j
- Page 57 and 58: In this case, all the finite or inf
- Page 59 and 60: probabilities p 1 , p 2 , … respe
- Page 61 and 62: where x is determined by the inequa
- Page 63 and 64: totality of the second type (§3.1.
- Page 65 and 66: x = /2 + /(23) + … + /(23… p n
- Page 67 and 68:
that the fall of a given die on any
- Page 69 and 70:
infinitely many digits only dependi
- Page 71 and 72:
10. (§2.1.5). Such two proposition
- Page 73 and 74:
F(x + h) - F(x) = Mh, therefore F(x
- Page 75 and 76:
“confidence” probability is bas
- Page 77 and 78:
x1+ Lp n (x) x1− Lx1+ Lf(t)dt < x
- Page 79 and 80:
|(x 1 ; t 0 ; t 1 ) - 1 t0tf(t)dt|
- Page 81 and 82:
5. The distribution ofξ , the arit
- Page 83 and 84:
P(x 1i < x) = F(x; a i ) = C(a i )
- Page 85 and 86:
egards his promises. Markov shows t
- Page 87 and 88:
other solely and equally possible i
- Page 89 and 90:
notion of probability and of its re
- Page 91 and 92:
However, already in the beginning o
- Page 93 and 94:
the revolution. My main findings we
- Page 95 and 96:
Nevertheless, Slutsky is not suffic
- Page 97 and 98:
path that would completely answer h
- Page 99 and 100:
on political economy as well as wit
- Page 101 and 102:
scientific merit. Borel was indeed
- Page 103 and 104:
[3] Already in Kiev Slutsky had bee
- Page 105 and 106:
different foundation. The difficult
- Page 107 and 108:
5. On the criterion of goodness of
- Page 109 and 110:
--- (1999, in Russian), Slutsky: co
- Page 111 and 112:
Here also, the author considers the
- Page 113 and 114:
second, it is not based on assumpti
- Page 115 and 116:
experimentation and connected with
- Page 117 and 118:
Russian, and especially of the Sovi
- Page 119 and 120:
station in England. This book, as h
- Page 121 and 122:
Uspekhi Matematich. Nauk, vol. 10,
- Page 123 and 124:
variety and detachment of those lat
- Page 125 and 126:
46. On the distribution of the regr
- Page 127 and 128:
119. On the Markov method of establ
- Page 129 and 130:
No lesser difficulties than those e
- Page 131 and 132:
Separate spheres of work considerab
- Page 133 and 134:
10. Anderson, O. Letters to Karl Pe
- Page 135 and 136:
Hier sind, im Allgemeinen, ganz ana
- Page 137 and 138:
Jedenfalls, glaube ich erwiesen zu
- Page 139 and 140:
werde ich das ganze Material in kur
- Page 141 and 142:
considered as the limiting case of
- Page 143 and 144:
and, inversely,] = m ...1 2 N[ ch h
- Page 145 and 146:
µ 2 2 = m 2 2 - 2m 2 m 1 2 + m 1 4
- Page 147 and 148:
(x k - x k+1 ) … (x k - x +) = E(
- Page 149 and 150:
the thus obtained relations as pert
- Page 151 and 152:
[1/S(S - 1)(S - 2)][(Si = 1Sx i ) 3
- Page 153 and 154:
( N −1)((S − N )(2NS− 3S− 3
- Page 155 and 156:
µ 5 + 2µ 2 µ 3 = U [S/S] 5 + 2U
- Page 157 and 158:
case, the same property is true wit
- Page 159 and 160:
It follows that the question about
- Page 161 and 162:
then expressed my doubts). And Gned
- Page 163 and 164:
For Problem 1, formula (7) shows th
- Page 165 and 166:
Let us calculate now, by means of f
- Page 167 and 168:
ϕ′1(x)1E(a|x 1 ; x 2 ; …; x n
- Page 169 and 170:
Theorem 3. If the prior density 3
- Page 171 and 172:
P( ≤ ≤ |, 1 , 2 , …, s )
- Page 173 and 174:
6. A Sensible Choice of Confidence
- Page 175 and 176:
0 = A 0 n, = B2, = B2, 0 = C 0 n
- Page 177 and 178:
Note also that (95),(96), (83),(85)
- Page 179 and 180:
Γ(n / 2)Γ [( n −1) / 2]k = (1/2
- Page 181 and 182:
f (x 1 , x 2 , …, x n ) = 1 if x
- Page 183 and 184:
and the probability of achieving no
- Page 185 and 186:
E = kEµ. (14)In many particular ca
- Page 187 and 188:
a = np, b = np 2 = a 2 /n, = a/nand
- Page 189 and 190:
with number (2k - 2), we commit an
- Page 191 and 192:
(67)which is suitable even without
- Page 193 and 194:
" = 1/[1 - e - ], = - ln [1 - (1/
- Page 195 and 196:
Such structures are entirely approp
- Page 197 and 198:
11. As a result of its historical d
- Page 199 and 200:
exaggeration towards a total denial