Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

>I'm still trying to develop the intuition for why minimizing E_2 implies taking the mean.

Maybe geometric motivation helps.

Consider two vectors

X = [x2,x2,...xN],

S = [(x1 - s), (x2 - s), ... , (xN - s)]

How is finding the shortest euclidean distance between X and S related to mean?




I don't understand what you're trying to get at here. Surely the shortest euclidian distance between X and S is obtained by setting s=0, which has nothing to do with the mean.


In nabla9's example, S would be the "vector discrepancy". If you want to minimize the discrepancy of s and X (NB. s and X, not S and X, I think this was a mistake), you want this vector to be as small as possible. In other words, you want the magnitude of the S vector to be minimal. This magnitude is given by the norm of the vector, sqrt(sum((S_i)^2)), which will reach a minimum when sum((S_i)^2) reaches a minimum.


Ok, but how does that provide intuition for sum((S_i)^2) reaching a minimum at the mean of the x values?


Can take the derivative and set it to zero and will get the definition for mean.


Sure, but that's not intuition.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: