Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Secretary Problem

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 66 posts

Re: Secretary Problem

#21

Post by aegiso »

gargarplex wrote: post #17
Johnie wrote: post #15

The same strategy can be used in dating too. When you live in a major city and the dating options are boundless, there is always someone around the corner that is "perfect" or more perfect than the current person that you are dating. Next thing you know, you're in your late 30s and still single.

I always feel bad when I see these posts. I'm 26 and in a major city, but finding dates is a serious problem for me. My looks are only slightly below average (4/10) but my personality is probably the deal breaker.

Having been where you've been, may I suggest that the dealbreaker is that you're treating dating like a World of Warcraft inventory checklist? I wish someone had told me that when I was saying the same things.

Re: Secretary Problem

#22

Post by gargarplex »

aegiso wrote: post #21
gargarplex wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always feel bad when I see these posts. I'm 26 and in a major city, but finding dates is a serious problem for me. My looks are only slightly below average (4/10) but my personality is probably the deal breaker.

Having been where you've been, may I suggest that the dealbreaker is that you're treating dating like a World of Warcraft inventory checklist? I wish someone had told me that when I was saying the same things.

Okay, so I definitely treat dating like a WoW inventory checklist... (not sure what the next step is)

Re: Secretary Problem

#23

Post by chaz »

FLUX-YOU wrote: post #9

I'm going to be the dumb guy ranting here and say that I dislike this word problem since external knowledge of the world can change your strategy. I might be stopping too soon because the time cost of evaluating candidates is far too high compared to the work that needs to be done immediately. The sooner I get someone in, the sooner that work gets done, the less behind we all get, the less workload for the new secret…

I think the difference is that you're reading it as practical word problem, when the intent is to present a math problem.

I first heard about this problem in a politically incorrect variation: a tribe chief is given the opportunity to choose a wife from a pool of n women, presented in a random order, one at a time. He can choose any woman, but can't choose a woman who he has already passed up. What's the strategy for the chief to choose the most beautiful wife?

Re: Secretary Problem

#24

Post by tunesmith »

gargarplex wrote: post #22
aegiso wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having been where you've been, may I suggest that the dealbreaker is that you're treating dating like a World of Warcraft inventory checklist? I wish someone had told me that when I was saying the same things.

Okay, so I definitely treat dating like a WoW inventory checklist... (not sure what the next step is)

There's no secret to it. You just have to doggedly keep at it.

Re: Secretary Problem

#26

Post by aaronsnoswell »

chaz wrote: post #23
FLUX-YOU wrote: post #9

I'm going to be the dumb guy ranting here and say that I dislike this word problem since external knowledge of the world can change your strategy. I might be stopping too soon because the time cost of evaluating candidates is far too high compared to the work that needs to be done immediately. The sooner I get someone in, the sooner that work gets done, the less behind we all get, the less workload for the new secret…

I think the difference is that you're reading it as practical word problem, when the intent is to present a math problem. I first heard about this problem in a politically incorrect variation: a tribe chief is given the opportunity to choose a wife from a pool of n women, presented in a random order, one at a time. He can choose any woman, but can't choose a woman who he has already passed up. What's the strategy for…

How is that variation politically incorrect? Genuine question here. If anything, to me it seems culturally correct.

Re: Secretary Problem

#27

Post by yogeshgirdhar »

vehementi wrote: post #7

What about needing to hire M candidates out of N applicants?

I worked on a version on this problem where the goal is to maximize the probability of hiring all top M candidates while using a similar single threshold strategy.

Here is a link to my paper: http://www.cim.mcgill.ca/~yogesh/publications/crv2009.pdf

Re: Secretary Problem

#28

Post by riffraff »

aegiso wrote: post #21
gargarplex wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always feel bad when I see these posts. I'm 26 and in a major city, but finding dates is a serious problem for me. My looks are only slightly below average (4/10) but my personality is probably the deal breaker.

Having been where you've been, may I suggest that the dealbreaker is that you're treating dating like a World of Warcraft inventory checklist? I wish someone had told me that when I was saying the same things.

FWIW, I do think there are similarities between dating and RPGs that I wish I had understood before

* you can improve your character: confidence is important, if you feel ugly sometimes you can do stuff about it (i.e. go to gym). Ditto if you are a boring talker, or if you are a poor listener.

* grind. If you are, like I was, a guy that has a couple hours on a weekend to meet a new possible date it's hard to find the "right" one. Try to increase the chances (go out more, frequent new places) and do try more.

Re: Secretary Problem

#29

Post by thaumasiotes »

sk5t wrote: post #11

Quite interesting that discarding the first n/e candidates produces a 1/e probability of choosing the optimal one... As for real-world applications, the only one that comes readily to mind is rolling up a D&D character, supposing one has only the patience for some predetermined n rolls. Somewhat ironically it is not a realistic fit for hiring, as there is seldom a need to accept or eliminate candidates immediately, i…

> Quite interesting that discarding the first n/e candidates produces a 1/e probability of choosing the optimal one...

Freeform thoughts from here:

1/e is the probability of failing (every time) if you try a 1/n chance n times, where n is large.

To get the optimal choice, there are two (generously defined) requirements:

- #1 does not occur in the discarded group

- #1 occurs before everyone else who was not discarded, but exceeds the maximum of the discarded group

The second one seems hairy to me, so I'll wrap things up here. ;p

> As for real-world applications, the only one that comes readily to mind is rolling up a D&D character

This was introduced to me as a marriage problem, and wikipedia also notes it by that name. The analogy never seemed inaccurate to me; it's frowned upon to evaluate candidates simultaneously and rare to accept someone other than the latest candidate.

Post reply on HN