4 ms·
it does give you a 36.8 percent chance My understanding is that this also give you 36.8% of not finding a wife at all because the best one is in the learning s
by netcan 12y ago
it does give you a 36.8 percent chance
My understanding is that this also give you 36.8% of not finding a wife at all because the best one is in the learning set. So 36.8% chance of success (picking the best one), 36.8% chance of no wife and 26.4% chance of picking the wrong one. I suppose there are different algorithms for different types of bachelors. Bachelors working under marry-or-lo-your-inheritance conditions are better off using different algorithms.
Using this method on a population of 100 prospective wives, what are the probabilities that: (1) you will pick the best wife (2) you will pick a wife in the top 3.
Thinking of this problem and eating a fun-blog level understanding of them is one of those things that give you "mental thinking models" of the Charlie Munger kind. Very useful.
EDIT: clarity
- JoeAltmaier 12y agoFor endless sample groups there is no chance of failure - there are always more individuals in every category including 'better than the first set of samples'. Also - I met my wife and continued to date but returned to her, because obviously it would have been futile to try to beat what she had going on. So you don't have to be a slave to the algorithm.
- netcan 12y agoYou must ask her immediately or she won't marry you.
- jcl 12y agoActually, if you are following the method described in the article, if the best candidate is in the learning set, you end up with the last one. So it's effectively a 36.8% chance of picking a random one from the "not-best" population.