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

51–60 of 66 posts

Re: Secretary Problem

#51

Post by prof_hobart »

philbarr wrote: post #44

Hmm, I wonder if this could be used to find a decent pub whilst in a strange city? It's always a problem when you're on holiday and you know there are n pubs around, but you don't want to spend all your time going around and checking each and every pub 'cos that gets tedious. The question is - how many pubs should I visit before I give up? As a general rule is this saying you should visit n/e pubs and then just pick…

It would. But you'd need to know, or at least guess, how many pubs there were in the city (to know when you'd reached n/e), and it would also depend on whether the pubs were randomly distributed or not. If there's nice end and a trashy end of town, you could easily have exhausted all of the good pubs before you hit the n/e.

Re: Secretary Problem

#52

Post by jonlucc »

philjohn wrote: post #31

There's a TV show in the UK that uses a spin on this - it's called 4 rooms. The premise is that people come on the show with, what they consider to be, a valuable artifact. They then have the chance to take it to 4 collectors who will offer them a sum of money for said artifact. The aim is to come away with the best offer you can get - but you only get one shot with each collector, you can't go back to a previous one…

According to the article, with such a small n, the contestant should visit ~1.47 of collectors before picking the best one. That's hard to do in practice.

Re: Secretary Problem

#53

Post by philbarr »

prof_hobart wrote: post #51
philbarr wrote: post #44

Hmm, I wonder if this could be used to find a decent pub whilst in a strange city? It's always a problem when you're on holiday and you know there are n pubs around, but you don't want to spend all your time going around and checking each and every pub 'cos that gets tedious. The question is - how many pubs should I visit before I give up? As a general rule is this saying you should visit n/e pubs and then just pick…

It would. But you'd need to know, or at least guess, how many pubs there were in the city (to know when you'd reached n/e), and it would also depend on whether the pubs were randomly distributed or not. If there's nice end and a trashy end of town, you could easily have exhausted all of the good pubs before you hit the n/e.

Yes, I guess you'd have to use real world factors to try and trim down your n before you start with the n/e thing. Although if you're in a strange place you probably won't know that much about which areas are good or not.

Re: Secretary Problem

#57

Post by dannypgh »

greenpresident wrote: post #41
roel_v wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really need to ask? Are you seriously incapable of seeing that some people might be offended (stupidly, if you ask me, but that doesn't make them any less so) by a story where a woman is apparently picked like cattle by a feudal lord?

I suspect he meant to say that the analogy accurately depicts something that really happens. An assessment that, incidentally, is pretty politically incorrect in itself.

Ah, yes, what an accurate depiction of the "tribe."

Seriously, if you want to go the accurate route, probably best to pick a specific people where that's what actually happens. Not having done that, the problem as stated advances stereotypes of peoples that are referred to as "tribes" as being primitive and misogynistic.

Perhaps use "nation" instead, or better yet, formulate the problem differently.

Re: Secretary Problem

#58

Post by Sammi »

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…

Isn't that basically how dating works? It's hard to go back to an ex...

Re: Secretary Problem

#59

Post by FLUX-YOU »

aleksi wrote: post #42
chaz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Interesting. In Russia this problem is known as choosy bride problem, where bride is looking for the best groom.

I hope Putin's not planning to apply this problem to decide which country to invade.

Re: Secretary Problem

#60

Post by eonwe »

aegiso wrote: post #19
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.

This only works if you stick with every partner long enough to get a perfectly accurate assessment of them as a long term mate, that your assements are perfectly objective, independent, and stable, and that you know n. The amount of ifs, ands, and buts in this caveat means it's time to defer to one of my favorite xkcd's of all time. [0] [0] http://xkcd.com/55/

And then commit to the choice you've made: http://xkcd.com/310/
Post reply on HN