Talk:Stochastic process

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Statistics (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page or join the discussion.

C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Mathematics (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject Mathematics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Mathematics rating:
C Class
Top Importance
 Field: Probability and statistics
One of the 500 most frequently viewed mathematics articles.
WikiProject Economics (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Stochasticity is from archery[edit]

The article should mention that no matter how fancy the statistics get, it's all present in the way arrows group themselves around their intended target, which was a pointed stick stuck in a Greek hillside --- a stochos. 69.105.38.7 (talk) 06:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

This etymology is already mentioned in the Stochastic article, which is where I think it belongs. Statisfactions (talk) 16:18, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Random fields vs. Stochastic processes[edit]

This article says that a "basic type of a stochastic process is a random field". But the random field article states that it is a generalization of a stochastic process. Which is which? Statisfactions (talk) 16:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

"C*-algebras of random variables"[edit]

There is an opaque mentioning of "C*-algebras of random variables", and the GNS construction in the construction section. Maybe it should say von Neumann algebras to be more specific? Could someone knowledgeable elaborate on that in the article? Presumably this refers to the C*-approach to conditional expectations (although I don't know what GNS has to do with it). Mct mht (talk) 11:04, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Moreover, all this should go to some article about noncommutative probability, or at least to some article about different approaches to probability theory as whole. Why is it mentioned in the article on stochastic processes? Boris Tsirelson (talk) 13:31, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Historical information?[edit]

It would be nice to have a note on when the concept first appeared in the mathematical literature, and by whom. RMPK (talk) 22:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

random variables are not natural numbers ?[edit]

The article says:"If both t and X_t belong to N, the set of natural numbers, ..." Is this correct ? How can the random variable X_t be a natural number ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.54.36.209 (talk) 10:22, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

It is non-rigorous but quite usual, to say such things as "almost surely, X is a number between a and b", "almost surely, X is an integer" etc., when X is a random variable. Even more non-rigorous and still usual (especially among non-mathematicians) is, to omit the "almost surely". Boris Tsirelson (talk) 10:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Reading Level[edit]

Simple as it may be, this article, or at least the introduction, are filled with jargon and are not written at an acceptable reading level. I recommended that those who are knowledgeable on the subject matter revise the introduction and make it more accessible to the public. As is, this is unreadable unless the reader has an extensive learning history with statistics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.162.169.233 (talk) 23:13, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Hopefully, the writing for the specialists can be maintained, and writing for beginners added right after. — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 14:41, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Heterogeneous process explanation[edit]

The Heterogeneous process page routes to this one, but then is not included in the explanation. This would be good to include for those rewriting this. Thanks. Alrich44 (talk) 15:10, 30 July 2014 (UTC)