Carlo M. Cipolla - URV
Carlo M. CipollaThe Basic Lawsof Human Stupidityil Mulino
ISBN978-88-15-23381-3Copyright 2011 by Società editrice il Mulino, Bologna.Ali rights reserved. Ko part of this publication may bereproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in anyform or by any means, without the prior permission in writingof Società editrice il Mulino. For further information seewww.mulino.it/edizioni/fotocopie
IndexPublisher's NoteThe Mad Millers to the ReaderIntroductionI.The First Basic LawIl.The Second Basic LawIII.A Technical InterludeIV.The Third (and Golden) Basic LawV.Frequency DistributionVI.Stupidity and PowerVII. The Power of StupidityVIII. The Fourth Basic LawIX.Macro Analysis and theFifth Basic LawAppendixp.791519232935414751555967
Publisher's NoteOriginally written in English, The BasicLaws of Human Stupidity was published forthe first time in 1976 in a numbered andprivate edition bearing the unlikely imprint of«Mad Millers».The author believed that his short essay couldonly be fully appreciated in the language inwhich it had been written. He consequently longdeclined any proposal to have it translated. Onlyin 1988 did he accept the idea of its publicationin an ltalian version as part of the volume en titled Allegro ma non troppo, together with theessay Pepper, Wine (and Wool) as the DynamicFactors of the Social and Economie Developmentof the Middle Ages, also originally written inEnglish and published privately by Mad Millersfor Christmas 1973.Allegro ma non troppo has been a bestseller bothin ltalv and in all the countries where translatedversio s have appeared. Yet, with an irony thatthe author of these laws would have appreciated,it has never been published in the language inwhich it was first written.7
Thus, almost a quarter of century since publica tion of Allegro ma non troppo, this in fact is thefirst edition that makes The Basic Laws ofHumanStupidity available in its original version.8
The Mad Millers to the ReaderThe private edition of 1976 was preceded bythe following publisher's note written by the au thor himself:The Mad Millers printed only a limited numberof copies of this book which addresses itself not tostupid people but to those who on occasion have todeal with such people. To add that none of thosewho will receive this book can possibly fall in areaS of the basic graph ( figure 1) is therefore a workof supererogation. Nevertheless, like most works ofsupererogation, it is better clone that left undone.For, as the Chinese philosopher said: «Eruditionis the source of universal wisdom: but that doesnot prevent it from being an occasional cause ofmisunderstanding between friends ».9
Introduction
Human affairs are admittedly in a deplorablestate. This, however, is no novelty. As far backas we can see, human affairs have alwavs been ina deplorable state. The heavy load of tro"ubles andmiseries that human beings have to bear as indi viduals as well as members of organized societiesis basically a by-product of the most improbable- and I would lare say, stupid - way in whichlife was set up at its very inception.After Darwin we know that we share our originwith the lower members of the animal kingdom,and worms as well as elephants have to bear theirdaily share of trials, predicaments, and ordeals.Human beings, however, are privileged in so faras they have to bear an extra load - an extradose of tribulations originated daily by a groupof people within the human race itself. Thisgroup is much more powerful than the Mafia, orthe Military lndustrial Complex, or InternationalCommunism - it is an unorganized uncharteredgroup which has no chief, no president, no by-lawsand yet manages to operate in perfect unison, asif guided by an invisible hand, in such a way that15
the activity of each member powerfully contributesto strengthen and amplify the effectiveness of theactivitv of all other members. The nature, characterand b haviour of the members of this group arethe subject of the following pages.Let me point out at this juncture that mostemphatically this little book is neither a product ofcvnicism nor an exercise in defeatism - no morethan a book on microbiology. The following pagesare in fact the result of a constructive effort todetect, know and thus possibly neutralize one ofthe most powerful, dark forces which hinder thegrowth of human welfare and happiness.16
Chapter IThe First Basic Law
The First Basic Law of Human Stupidity assertswithout ambiguity that«Always and inevitably everyone under estimates the number of stupid individualsin circulation» 1.At first, the statement sounds trivial, vagueand horribly ungenerous. Closer scrutiny willhowever reveal its realistic veracitv. No matterhow high are one's estimates of hu an stupidity,one is repeatedly and recurrently startled by thefact that:a) People whom one had once judged rationaland intelligent turn out to be unashamedly stupid.b) Day after day, with unceasing monotony,one is harassed in one's activities by stupid indi1 The compilers of the Testament were aware of theFirst Basic Law and they paraphrased it when they assertedthat "stultorum infinitus est numerus» but they indulged inpoetic exaggeration. The number of stupid people cannot beinfinite because the number of living people is finite.19
viduals who appear suddenly and unexpectedlyin the most inconvenient places and at the mostimprobable moments.The First Basic Law prevents me from attrib uting a specific numerical value to the fractionof stupid people within the total population: anynumerical estimate would turn out to be an under estimate. Thus in the following pages I will denotethe fraction of stupid people within a populationby the symbol u.20
Chapter IIThe Second Basic Law
ultural trends now fashionable in the Westfavour an egalitarian approach to life. Peoplelike to think of human beings as the output of aperfectly engineered mass production machine.Geneticists and sociologists especially go out oftheir way to prove, with an impressive apparatusof scientific data and formulations that all menare naturally equal and if some are more equalthan the others, this is attributable to nurture andnot to nature.I take an exception to this general view. It ismy firm conviction, supported by years of ob servation and experimentation, that men are notequal, that some are stupid and others are not,and that the difference is determined by natureand not by cultural forces or factors. One is stupidin the same way one is red-haired; one belongsto the stupid set as one belongs to a blood group.A stupid man is born a stupid man by an act ofProvidence.Although convinced that fraction a of humanbeings are stupid and that they are so becauseC23
of genetic traits, I am not a reactionary tryingto reintroduce surreptitiously class or race dis crimination. I firmly believe that stupidity is anindiscriminate privilege of all human groups andis uniformly distrihuted according to a constantproportion. This fact is scientifically expressed bythe Second Basic Law which states that«The probability that a certain personbe stupid is independent of anv othercharacteristic of that person».ln this regard, Nature seems indeed to haveoutdone herself. It is well known that Naturemanages, rather mysteriously, to keep constantthe relative frequency of certain natural phe nomena. For instance, whether men proliferateat the Northern Pole or at the Equator, whetherthe matching couples are developed or underde veloped, whether they are black, red, white oryellow the female to male ratio among the newlyborn is a constant, with a very slight prevalenceof males. We do not know how Nature achievesthis remarkable result but we know that in or der to achieve it Nature must operate with largenumbers. The most remarkable fact about thefrequency of stupidity is that Nature succeeds inmaking this frequency equal to the probability aquite independently from the size of the group.Thus one finds the same percentage of stupid peo ple whether one is considering very large groupsor one is dealing with very small ones. No other24
set of observable phenomena offers such strikingproof of the powers of Nature.The evidence that education has nothing to dowith the probability rY was provided by experimentscarried on in a large number of universities ailover the world. One may distinguish the compositepopulation which constitutes a university in fivemajor groups, namely the blue-collar workers, thewhite-collar employees, the students, the admin istrators and the professors.Whenever I analvzed the blue-collar workers Ifound that the fraction rY of them were stupid. AsrY's value was higher than I expected (First Law),paying my tribute to fashion I thought at fîrstthat segregation, poverty, lack of education wereto be blamed. But moving up the social ladder Ifound that the same ratio was prevalent among thewhite-collar employees and among the students.More impressive still were the results among theprofessors. Whether I considered a large univer sity or a small college, a famous institution or anobscure one, I found that the same fraction rY ofthe professors are stupid. So bewildered was I bythe results, that I made a special point to extendmy research to a specially selected group, to a realélite, the Nobel laureates. The result confîrmedNature's supreme powers: rY fraction of the Nobellaureates are stupid.This idea was hard to accept and digest but toomany experimental results proved its fondamentalveracity. The Second Basic Law is an iron law, and itdoes n t admit exceptions. The Women's Liberation25
Movement will support the Second Basic Law asit shows that stupid individuals are proportionallyas numerous among men as among women. Theunderdeveloped of the Third World will probablytake salace at the Second Basic Law as thev canfind in it the proof that af ter all the deveiopedare not so developed. Whether the Second BasicLaw is liked or not, however, its implications arefrightening: the Law implies that whether youmove in distinguished circles or you take refugeamong the head-hunters of Polynesia, whether youIock yourself into a monastery or decide to spendthe rest of your life in the company of beautifuland lascivious women, you always have to facethe same percentage of stupid people - whichpercentage (in accordance with the First Law)will always surpass your expectations.26
Chapter IIIA Technical Interlude
At this point it is imperative to elucidate theJ-\. concept of human stupidity and to define thedramatis persona.lndividuals are characterized by differentdegrees of propensity to socialize. There areindividuals for whom any contact with otherindividuals is a painful necessity. They literallyhave to put up with people and people have toput up with them. At the other extreme of thespectrum there are individuals who absolutelycannot live by themselves and are even ready tospend time in the company of people whom theydo not reallv like rather than to be alone. Betweenthese two e tremes, there is an extreme variety ofconditions, although by far the greatest majorityof the people are doser to the type who cannotface loneliness than to the type who has no tastefor human intercourse. Aristotiles recognized thisfact when he wrote that «Man is a social animal »and the validity of his statement is demonstratedby the fact that we move in social groups, thatthere are more married people than bachelors and29
spinsters, that so much wealth and time is wastedin fatiguing and boring cocktail parties and thatthe word loneliness carries normally a negativeconnotation.Whether one belongs to the hermit or to thesocialite type, one deals with people although withdifferent intensity. Even the hermits occasionallymeet people. Moreover, one affects human beingsalso by avoiding them. What I could have clonefor an individual or a group but did not do is anopportunity-cost (i.e. a lost gain or loss) for thatparticular person or group. The moral of the storyis that each one of us has a current balance witheverybody else. From action or inaction each oneof us derives a gain or a loss and at the sametime one causes a gain or a loss to some one else.Gains and losses can be convenientlv charted ona graph, and figure 1 shows the basi graph to beused for the purpose.The graph refers to an individual - let ussay Tom. The X axis measures the gain that Tomderives from his actions. On the Y axis the graphshows the gain that another person or group ofpersons derive from Tom's actions. Gains can bepositive, nil or negative - a negative gain beingactually a loss. The X axis measures Tom's positivegains to the right of point O and Tom's losses tothe left of point O. The Y axis measures the gainsand losses of the person or persons with whom Tomdealt respectively above and below point O.To make all this clear, let us make a hypotheti cal example and refer to figure 1. Tom takes an30
yHl X0 sBFic. 1.action which affects Dick. If Tom derives fromthe action a gain and Dick suffers from the sameaction a loss, the action will be recorded on thegraph with a dot which will appear in the graphsomewhere in area B.Gains and losses may be recorded on the X andY axis in dollars or francs, if one wants, but onehas to include also psychological and emotionalrewards and satisfactions as well as psychologi-31
cal and emotional stresses. These are intangiblesand they are very difficult to measure accordingto objective standards . Cost-benefit analysis canhelp to solve the problem, although not completely,but I do not want to bother the reader with suchtechnicalities: a margin of imprecision is bound toaffect the measurement but it does not affect theessence of the argument. One point though mustbe made clear. When considering Tom 's action onemakes use of Tom's values but one has to rely onDick's values and not on Tom's values to deter mine Dick's gains ( whether positive or negative) .All too often this rule of fairness is forgotten andmany troubles originate from failure to apply thisessentially urbane point of view. Let me resortonce again to a banal example. Tom hits Dick onDick's head and he derives satisfaction from hisaction. He may pretend that Dick was delightedto be hit on the head. Dick, however, may notshare Tom's view. ln fact he may regard the.blowon his head as an unpleasant event. Whether theblow on Dick's head was a gain or a loss to Dickis up to Dick to decide and not to Tom.32
Chapter IVThe Third ( and Golden) Basic Law
The Third Basic Law assumes, although it doesnot state it explicitly, that human beings fallinto four basic categories: the helpless, the intel ligent, the bandit and the stupid. lt will be easilyrecognized by the perspicacious reader that thesefour categories correspond to the four areas /, H,S, B, of the basic graph (see figure 1 ).If Tom takes an action and suffers a loss whileproducing a gain to Dick, Tom's mark will fallin field H: Tom acted helplessly. If Tom takes anaction by which he makes a gain while yielding again also to Dick, Tom's mark will fall in area /:Tom acted intelligently. If Tom takes an action bywhich he makes a gain causing Dick a loss, Tom'smark will fall in area B: Tom acted as a bandit.Stupidity is related to area S and to all positionson axis Y below point O.As the Third Basic Law explicitly clarifies:35
«A stupid person is a person who causeslosses to another person or to a group ofpersons while himself deriving no gain andeven possibly incurring losses» .When confronted for the first time with theThird Basic Law, rational people instinctively reactwith feelings of skepticism and incredulousness.The fact is that reasonable people have difficultyin conceiving and understanding unreasonablebehaviour. But let us abandon the lofty plane oftheory and let us look pragmatically at our dailylife. We ail recollect occasions in which a fellowtook an action which resulted in his gain and inour loss: we had to deal with a bandit. We alsorecollect cases in which a fellow took an actionwhich resulted in his loss and in our gain: we hadto deal with a helpless person 1 We can recollectcases in which a fellow took an action bv whichboth parties gained: he was intelligent. Su h casesdo indeed occur. But upon thoughtful reflectionyou must admit that these are not the events hich punctuate most frequently our daily life.Our daily life is mostly made of cases in whichwe lose money and/or time and/or energy and/orappetite, cheerfulness and good health becauseof the improbable action of some preposterous1 Notice the qualification «a fellow took an action » .The fact h e took the action i s decisive i n establishing thathe is helpless. If I took the action which resulted in mygain and his loss, then the judgment would be different: Iwould be a bandit.36
creature who has nothing to gain and indeed gainsnothing from causing us embarrassment, difficul ties or harm. Nobody knows, understands or canpossibly explain why that preposterous creaturedoes what he does. ln fact there is no explana tion - or better, there is only one explanation:the person in question is stupid.37
Chapter VFrequency Distribution
Most people do not act consistently. Undercertain circumstances a given person actsintelligently and under different circumstancesthe same person will act helplessly. The onlyimportant exception to the rule is represented bythe stupid people who normally show a strongproclivity toward perfect consistency in all fieldof human endeavours.From all that proceeds, it does not followthat we can chart on the basic graph only stupidindividuals. We can calculate for each person hisweighted average position in the plane of figure 1quite independently from his degree of inconsist ency. A helpless person may occasionally behaveintelligently and on occasion he may perform abandit's action. But since the person in questionis fundamentally helpless most of his action willhave the characteristics of helplessness. Thus theoverall weighted average position of all the actionsof such person will place him in the H quadrantof the basic graph.The fact that it is possible to place on thegraph individuals instead of their actions allows41
some digression about the frequency of the banditand stupid types.The perfect bandit is one who, with his actions,causes to other individuals losses equal to his gains.The crudest type of banditry is theft. A person whorobs you of 100 pounds without causing you anextra loss or harm is a perfect bandit: you lose 100pounds, he gains 100 pounds. ln the basic graph theperfect bandits would appear on a 45 degree diago nal line that divides the area B into two perfectlysymmetrical sub-areas (line OM of figure 2).However the «perfect» bandits are relativelyfew. The line OM divided the area B into two sub areas, B, and B8, and by far the largest majorityof the bandits fall somewhere in one of these twosub-areas.The bandits who fall in area B1 are those indi viduals whose actions yield to them profits whichare larger than the losses they cause to other people.All bandits who are entitled to a position in areaB1 are bandits with overtones of intelligence andas they get doser to the right side of the X axisthey share more and more the characteristics of theintelligent person. Unfortunately the individualsentitled to a position in the B, area are not verynumerous. Most bandits actually fall in area B8 .The individuals who fall in this area are thosewhose actions yield to them gains inferior to thelosses inflicted to other people. If someone killsyou in order to rob from you fifty pounds or if hemurders you in order to spend a weekend withyour wife at Monte Carlo, we can be sure that he42
yI0XsMFic:. 2 .is not a perfect bandit. Even by using his valuesto measure his gains (but still using your valuesto rneasure your losses) he falls in the B8 areavery close to the border of sheer stupidity. Gener als who cause vast destructions and innumerablecasualties in return for a promotion or a medalfall in the same area.The frequency distribution of the stupid peopleis totally different from that of the bandit. While43
bandits are mostly scattered over an area stupidpeople are heavily concentrated along one line,specifically on the Y axis below point O. The reasonfor this is that by far the majority of stupid peopleare basically and unwaveringly stupid - in otherwords they perseveringly insist in causing harm andlosses to other people without deriving any gain,whether positive or negative. There are howeverpeople who by their improbable actions not onlycause damages to other people but in addition hurtthemselves. They are a sort of super-stupid who, inour system of accounting, will appear somewherein the area S to the left of the Y axis.44
Chapter VIStupidity and Power
Like all human creatures, also stupid peoplevary enormously in their capacity to affecttheir fellow men. Sorne stupid people normallycause only limited losses while others egregiouslysucceed in causing ghastly and widespread dam ages not only to one or two individuals but toentire communities or societies. The damagingpotential of the stupid person depends on twomajor factors. First of all, it depends on the ge netic factor. Sorne individuals inherit exceptionaldoses of the gene of stupidity and by virtue ofinheritance they belong from birth to the élite oftheir group. The second factor which determinesthe potential of a stupid person is related to theposition of power and consequence which heoccupies in society. Among bureaucrats, gener als, politicians and heads of state one has littledifficulty in finding clear examples of basicallystupid individuals whose damaging capacity was( or is) alarmingly enhanced by the position ofpower which they occupied ( or occupy) . Religiousdignitaries should not be overlooked.47
The question that reasonable people often raiseis how and why stupid people can reach positionsof power and consequence.Class and caste were the social arrangementswhich favoured the steady supply of stupid peopleto positions of power in most societies of the pre industrial world. Religion was another contributingfactor. In the modern industrial world class andcaste are banished both as words and as conceptsand religion is fading away. But in lieu of class andcaste we have political parties and bureaucracyand in lieu of religion we have democracy. Withina democratic system, general elections are a mosteffective instrument to insure the steadv mainte nance of fraction rY among the powerfui. One hasto keep in mind that according to the Second BasicLaw, the fraction rY of the voting population arestupid people and elections offer to all of them atonce a magnificent opportunity to harm everybodyelse without gaining anything from their action.They do so by contributing to the maintenance ofthe rY level among those in power.48
Chapter VIIThe Power of Stupidity
It is not difficult to understand how social, politicaland institutional power enhances the damagingpotential of a stupid person. But one still has toexplain and understand what essentially it is thatmakes a stupid person dangerous to other people- in other words what constitutes the power ofstupidity.Essentially stupid people are dangerous anddamaging because reasonable people find it dif ficult to imagine and understand unreasonablebehaviour. An intelligent person may understandthe logic of a bandit. The bandit's actions fol low a pattern of rationality: nasty rationality, ifyou like, but still rationality. The bandit wantsa plus on his account. Since he is not intelligentenough to devise ways of obtaining the plus aswell as providing you with a plus, he will producehis plus by causing a minus to appear on youraccount. AU this is bad, but it is rational andif you are rational you can predict it. You canforesee a bandit's actions, his nasty manoeuvresand ugly aspirations and often can build up yourdefences.51
With a stupid person all this is absolutelyimpossible as explained by the Third Basic Law.A stupid creature will harass you for no reason,for no advantage, without any plan or schemeand at the most improbable times and places.You have no rational way of telling if and whenand how and why the stupid creature attacks.When confronted with a stupid individual youare completely at his mercy.Because the stupid person's actions do not con form to the rules of rationalitv, it follows that:a) one is generally caught. by surprise by theattack;b) even when one becomes aware of the attack,one cannot organize a rational defence, becausethe attack itself lacks any rational structure.The fact that the activitv and movements of astupid creature are absolutely erratic and irrationalnot only makes defence problematic but it alsomakes any counterattack extremely difficult - liketrying to shoot at an object which is capable of themost improbable and unimaginable movements.This is what both Dickens and Schiller had inmind when the former stated that « with stupidityand sound digestion man may front much» andthe latter wrote that «against stupidity the veryGods :fight in vain».52
Chapter VIIIThe Fourth Basic Law
That helpless people, namely those who in ouraccounting system fall into the H area, do notnormally recognize how dangerous stupid peopleare, is not at all surprising. Their failure is justanother expression of their helplessness. The trulyamazing fact, however, is that also intelligent peo ple and bandits often fail to recognize the powerto damage inherent in stupidity. lt is extremelydifficult to explain why this should happen andone can only remark that when confronted withstupid individuals often intelligent men as well asbandits make the mistake of indulging in feelingsof self-complacency and contemptuousness insteadof immediately secreting adequate quantities ofadrenalin and building up defences.One is tempted to believe that a stupid manwill only do harm to himself but this is confusingstupidity with helplessness. On occasion one istempted to associate oneself with a stupid indi vidual in order to use him for one's own schemes.Such a manoeuvre cannot but have disastrouseffects because a) it is based on a complete mis understanding of the essential nature of stupidity55
and b) it gives the stupid person added scope forthe exercise of his gifts. One may hope to out manoeuvre the stupid and up to a point one mayactuallv do so. But because of the erratic behaviourof the ;tupid, one cannot foresee ail the stupid'sactions and reactions and before long one willbe pulverized by the unpredictable moves of thestupid partner.This is clearlv summarized in the Fourth BasicLaw which stat s that:«Non-stupid people always underesti mate the damaging power of stupid indi viduals. ln particular non-stupid peopleconstantly forget that at all times and placesand under any circumstances to deal and/orassociate with stupid people infallibly turnsout to be a costly mistake».Through centuries and millennia, in public asin private life, countless individuals have failedto take account of the Fourth Basic Law and thefailure has caused mankind incalculable losses.56
Chapter IXMacro Analysisand the Fifth Basic Law
The consideration on which the previous chapterends is conducive to a macro-type of analysisin which instead of considering the welfare of theindividual one considers the welfare of the society,regarded in this context as the algebric sum of theindividual conditions. A full understanding of theFifth Basic Law is essential to the analvsis. lt maybe parenthetically added here that f the Fiv Basic Laws, the Fifth is certainly the best knownand its corollary is quoted very frequently. TheFifth Basic Law states that« A stupid person is the most dangeroustype of person».The corollary of the Law is that«A stupid person is more dangerousthan a bandit».The formulation of the Law and its corollaryis still of the micro-type. As indicated above, how-59
ever, the Law and its corollary have far reachingimplications of a macro-nature.The essential point to keep in mind is this:the result of the action of a perfect bandit (theperson who falls on line OM of figure 2) is purelyand simply a transfer of wealth and/or welfare.After the action of a perfect bandit, the bandithas a plus on his account which plus is exactlyequivalent to the minus he has caused to an other person. The society as a whole is neitherbetter nor worse off. If ail members of a societywere perfect bandits the society would remainstagnant but there would be no major disaster.The whole business would amount to massivetransfers of wealth and welfare in favour of thosewho would take action. If all members of thesociety would take action in regular turns, notonly the society as a whole but also individualswould find themselves in a perfectly steady stateof no change.When stupid people are at work, the storyis totally different. Stupid people cause lossesto other people with no counterpart of gains ontheir own account. Thus the society as a whole isimpoverished.The system of accounting which finds expres sion in the basic graphs shows that while all ac tions of individuals falling to the right of the linePOM (see fig. 3) add to the welfare of a society,although in different degrees, the actions of ailindividuals falling to the left of the same line POMcause a deterioration.60
pyI0XsMFrc. 3 .ln other words the helpless with overtonesof intelligence (area H1) , the bandits with over tones of intelligence ( area B1 ) and above allthe intelligent (area /) all con tribu te, thoughin different degrees, to accrue to the welfare ofa society. On the other hand the bandits withoverton s of stupidity (area B5) and the helplesswith overtones of stupidity (area H8 ) manage toadd losses to those caused by stupid people thus61
enhancing the nefarious destructive power of thelatter group.All this suggests some reflection on
my research to a specially selected group, to a real élite, the Nobel laureates. The result confîrmed Nature's supreme powers: rY fraction of the Nobel laureates are stupid. This idea was hard to accept and digest but too many experimental results proved its fondame
c/o GERALD THOMAS CIPOLLA CIPOLLA LAW GROUP 332 S MICHIGAN AVE STE 1100 CHICAGO IL 60604 Notice Type: Approval Notice Class: HIB Valid from 09/01/2019 to 08/31/2022 We have mailed an official notice about this case (and any relevant documentation) according to the mailing preferences you chose on Form G-28, Notice
The Markov Chain Monte Carlo Revolution Persi Diaconis Abstract The use of simulation for high dimensional intractable computations has revolutionized applied math-ematics. Designing, improving and understanding the new tools leads to (and leans on) fascinating mathematics, from representation theory through micro-local analysis. 1 IntroductionCited by: 343Page Count: 24File Size: 775KBAuthor: Persi DiaconisExplore furtherA simple introduction to Markov Chain Monte–Carlo .link.springer.comHidden Markov Models - Tutorial And Examplewww.tutorialandexample.comA Gentle Introduction to Markov Chain Monte Carlo for .machinelearningmastery.comMarkov Chain Monte Carlo Lecture Noteswww.stat.umn.eduA Zero-Math Introduction to Markov Chain Monte Carlo .towardsdatascience.comRecommended to you b
Quasi Monte Carlo has been developed. While the convergence rate of classical Monte Carlo (MC) is O(n¡1 2), the convergence rate of Quasi Monte Carlo (QMC) can be made almost as high as O(n¡1). Correspondingly, the use of Quasi Monte Carlo is increasing, especially in the areas where it most readily can be employed. 1.1 Classical Monte Carlo
Multi-Gate MOSFETs 1) A purely design-oriented model developed by UCL/URV for symmetric DGMOSFETs. It is based on a 1D electrostatic analysis with semi fitting parameters for short- FinFETs and Tri-Gate MOSFETs if they are narrow enough. 2) A "mixed" predictive design UdS/EPFL with the recent collaboration from URV.
Fourier Analysis of Correlated Monte Carlo Importance Sampling Gurprit Singh Kartic Subr David Coeurjolly Victor Ostromoukhov Wojciech Jarosz. 2 Monte Carlo Integration!3 Monte Carlo Integration f( x) I Z 1 0 f( x)d x!4 Monte Carlo Estimator f( x) I N 1 N XN k 1 f( x k) p( x
Carlo Rovelli Carlo Rovelli ŘÁD ČASU edice aliter Carlo Rovelli, přední teoretický fyzik, spolutvůrce smyčkové kvantové gravita - ce, ale také výtečný spisovatel, se ve své nejnovější knize zabývá tajemstvím ča-su, možná vůbec nej
Introduction to Markov Chain Monte Carlo Monte Carlo: sample from a distribution - to estimate the distribution - to compute max, mean Markov Chain Monte Carlo: sampling using "local" information - Generic "problem solving technique" - decision/optimization/value problems - generic, but not necessarily very efficient Based on - Neal Madras: Lectures on Monte Carlo Methods .
Brussels, 17.7.2012 COM(2012) 392 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS A Reinforced European Research Area Partnership for Excellence and Growth (Text with EEA relevance) {SWD(2012) 211 final} {SWD(2012) 212 final}
