"Look at him! That's my quant. My quantitative! My math specialist. Look at him. Do you notice anything different about him? Look at his face...look at his eyes! His name is Yang. He won a national math competition in CHINA and he doesn't even speak English! Yeah, I'm sure of the math..." - Jared Vennett (the Big Short 2015)
Ted Jiang : [to camera] Actually, my name's Jiang and I do speak English. Jared likes to say I don't because he thinks it makes me seem more authentic. And I got second in that national math competition.
there is a much simpler way of approaching it using the naive definition of probability. How many possible "good" pairings are there? well we have the following: { (4,4), (5,5), (6, 6), (5, 6), (5 , 4) }. Since we're only looking at unique sets, our denominator should be the total possible number of ways we can make distinct sets of 2 from 6 objects. This is by definition the binomial coefficient (the choose operator). We have 6 Choose 2 = 15. 5/15 = 1/3
@@nu-tral you got the right answer with wrong working by luck, C(6,2) counts the number of ways to choose a single distinct pair from 6 distinct objects. The total number of ways to choose 3 distinct pairs from 6 distinct objects is 6!/[(2!)^3*3!] =15. This is because if we imagine 6 places in a line with the position (1,2)(3,4)(5,6) forming pairs, we first do all possible permutation of 6 objects across this places, but we don’t care about order within a pair, so divide total by 2! three times, then we don’t care how we order the pairs, ie, we don’t care if one pair comes before another or after, since we have 3 pairs, divide by 3!. Then you count how to uniquely choose legal pairs, conditioning on if the size 5s are together or not, which is 1 if they are, +2 for if (5,4) and +2 for (5,6) which is 1+2+2=5. So total 5/15
For the last problem, introduce two states. One where we have balls in one of the buckets and one where we have balls in two of them. We know before flipping the coin that we will have at least one ball so put it in any bucket, we will then be in the first state described above. Now the game can be formulated as follows, whenever we toss a tails randomly add a ball to one of the three buckets and whenever we flip a heads we stop and see if all three buckets are full. The probability of winning this game (the game ending with all buckets full) is equivalent to the formulation in the video. We now see that the possible moves from state 1 are: to losing, back to state 1 or to state 2 and possible transitions from state 2 are: to losing, back to state 2 or winning. Now assign probabilities, p1 and p2, of us winning given that we are in state 1 and 2 respectively (this makes sense as the game has no memory, i.e the probability of winning from a given state is always the same). We know that p1 = 1/2*0 + 1/2*1/3*p1 + 1/2*2/3*p2. (Half of the time we flip a head and lose (only 1 bucket is full), the other half we add a ball randomly to our buckets. 1/3 of the time this will be to the bucket that is already full and 2/3 into one of the other 2 moving us to state 2). Similarly we get that p2 = 1/2*0 + 1/2*1/3 + 1/2*2/3*p2 (here one could talk about a winning state but it's not really necessary. The point is once we reach it we know we will win the game) implying p2=1/4. From the first equation p1 =2/5*p2 and we finally get p1=1/10. This might seem complicated when formulated in a comment like this but the methodology is really powerful and can be used for a wide range of problems. Almost always when you get an infinite sum in your solution the problem could've been formulated with states and implicit formulas would've given you the answer in a much neater fashion.
Get immediate access to our #1 quant interview preparation course at www.QuantBlueprint.com and break into firms like Jane Street, Citadel, HRT, and more.
You could say there are four possible arrangements with three producing those 3 acceptable pairs (ap). Therefore, 75% of the time you will get a pairing that satisfies the ap requirement. Another way to explain this is using the 1/3 fraction they used in the film, however I would write it 3/1. This is because I consider this like a step-up transformer formula. There are 3 conditions that work and 1 that doesn't. The 1st condition (1) is the primary coil and the 2nd condition (3) is the secondary coil. A step up transformer boosts power and because there are 3 positive outcomes to 1 negative outcome we know it is more likely to get the ap we want. Always divide the secondary coils by primary for the step-up calculation. So, 3/1 = 3. It all depends on how you look at things.
What always helps me when dealing with events is to always imagine a branching graph of possible transitions over all combos and resulting outcomes. Kinda limited markovian chain. When you see that graph it much easier to understand the simple idea of arithmetic for probability finding.
More elegant way to do the last question is to view each toss as going to bin A, B, C or ending the game with probss 1/6,1/6,1/6,3/6. wlog A gets the first ball. P(B empty) = P(fill B before ending) = 3/4. P(B, C both empty) = 3/5. Inclusion-exclusion -> P(B or C empty) = 2*3/4 - 3/5 = 9/10.
@@Ten_Eleven_Twelve_Thirteen P(event X happens before event Y) = P(event X happens | event X or event Y happens) = P(X) / [P(X) + P(Y)], so e.g. the 3/4 comes from 3/6 / [3/6 + 1/6] = 3 / [1+3]. I think I meant to write P(end before filling B) in the above btw.
I remember reading Michael’s Lewis’ book about SBF and FTX. The section about SBF’s interview at Jane street was pretty fascinating. Quant’s have an interesting mind.
Q1 can be done in an easier way. the number of possible pairs is we pair the first shoes with 5 shoes, then the next one with 3 shoes and last 1 with the remaining shoe. (so there are5x3x1=15 total pairs). now the allowed ones are (using the provided notation) a1a2,b1b2,c1,c2 and then a1a2,b1c1,b2c2 or a1a2,b1c2,b2c1 (and for these last 2 we multiply them by 2 so that we get the cases where a's and b's mix). so in total 5/15 = 1/3 are allowed.
First question: 1/5 * 2/3 + 1/5 * 1/3 = 1/5 (left and right shoes). 3 pairs of 6 shoes, no replacement. Fix the first shoe, you have 5 options left. Only 2 of those make a valid pair, and once chosen fist valid pair, remaining has 2/3 and 1/3 prob for each choice
"Question 1: You find yourself in a position where you need to short $GME due to market demand from peasant retail investors, and there are no shares available in the market to open short positions on legally to offset this buy pressure, but this must be done otherwise our entire business model will be liquidated. Do you know how to hit 'F3' on a keyboard?"
This seemed like a really weird way to say how many invalid sets can be made and whats the probability randomly selecting a valid set from all possible sets. The selection bit trips people up a lot. It doesnt matter because everything gets paired. Its really just asking of all possible sets of {445566}, imagine all the valid {(45),(54),66)} and invalid sets {(64),(64),(55)} (*2 ways this could happen*) - were written on a scraps of paper and thrown in a bag, whats the chance of picking out a scrap that had a valid set, or what is the probability of not picking a scrap that has (46) or (64) in any of the 3 pairings. If the bag had every variation of A1A2.. how many scraps would have AC pairings in any of the 3 pairs (A1C1, A1C2, A2C1, A2C2).
Yeah really can't stand people in the industry they're over paid & can't stand people not in the industry cause they have no desire to learn the basic arithmetic that would allow them to escape their indefinite indentured servitude.
Despite all the combinatorial details and potential double-counting pitfalls, the final probability that you randomly form 3 acceptable pairs (where each pair differs by at most 1 shoe size) is:1/3
Closed my eyes and came up with 1/3 as the answer to the first question. When he started talking, I thought to myself wow I’m way off I didn’t do any of that. Then he finalized the answer at 1/3. Either he over complicated it, or I got lucky.
I have the same problem. My math teacher used to ask me well how do you know you are right? How do you check? I said that's not my job here. My job is to answer for you to check😆 It's cursed blessings my friend.
Here's how I thought about the first problem: Consider a size 4 shoe, without loss of generality assume it's the left shoe. Then, there are 3 right shoes to match it with, sizes 4, 5 and 6. So the chance we match the size 4 left shoe satisfactorily is 2/3. Now consider the size 4 right shoe. Since we already matched the size 4 left shoe, There are only 2 left shoes to match it with, sizes 5 and 6. The chance we match the size 4 right shoe satisfactorily is 1/2. So the chance we match both shoes correctly is (2/3)*(1/2) = 1/3
one of the approach for the first problem (maybe the easiest approach for a generalised case and this particular imo) p(n) respresent to number of ways to pair 1,2,3..,n among 1,2,3...n such that they all are acceptable, so p(n) = p(n-1)/(2*n-1)+2*p(n-2)/(2*n-1)(2*n-3) because there is a 1/n-1 probability to pair n->n(the remaining independent probability would be p(n-1)) and 2/(2*n-1)(2*n-3) probability to pair n->n-1 and n-> n-1 (remaining probabilty depends on independent probability of p(n-2)) the base case for this reccurence woould be p(0) = 1 p(1) = 1 this would result in p(3) = 1/3 which is the answer hope this helps!!!!
For the first question, I have an issue with the answer proposed by the student : he decides to put an order on how shoes are picked. For example, in his reasoning, he distinguishes (a1,a2) with (a2, a1). But, to me, such pairs are the same. Am I wrong ? Should such cases be distinguished ?
You can count either way assuming each shoe of a size is different or not, as long as you stay consistent. Total combinations is 6!/2^3, as opposed to permutations of 6!
i worked as a quant at optiver for 3 years in the us office in chicago. These questions are entirely expected at an interview. You won't be doing this shit for work tho. These foundational skills help give you the ability to seek out patterns and signals within data but at the end of the day, your whole job wont just be maths -- you'll have actual projects to complete. Honestly just make sure you can program pretty decently -- especially with asynchronous programming, data science libs (like numpy, pandas, etc), and the like
I found another way that I used. Basically for the shoe problem if there is a difference of 1, you can take 2/6C2 and for the same size you have only 3 outcomes so it is 3/6C2 and they are both equal to 2/15 and 3/15 respectively. Their sum isj ust 5/15 = 1/3
I'm a bit rusty on these but dont we need to exclude k = 1 and k = 2? If we have less than 3 balls then the probability of having an empty bin is 100%. So in the geometric series we should exclude the first 2 values in our summation
Question 1 I don’t think you mentioned anything about right and left shoes being a requirement for an acceptable pair, so 2 right shoes, size 4 and 5 would be acceptable?
The solution for the first question is wrong. Each show has left and right, you can’t pair left and left on any size. There are much fewer possible combinations. Luckily the answer is still 2/3 but candidate and interviewer misinterpreted the question.
this might be a dumb question but doesn't the probability change if the first pick if 4/6 vs 5. just because the two 5s matched doesn't mean that the next two pairs are acceptable.
For the Q1 for shoe pairs, the provided answer doesn't look to be correct. There is a total of 90 combinations - 6C2 * 4C2 * 2C2 and 8 pairs are not accepted which are (a being left foot and b right foot) - 6a with 5a, 4a, 4b And 6b with 5b, 4a, 4b And 5a, 4a And 5b, 4b. So all the combination with these 8 pairs will have to discarded as unacceptable, which gives 8 * 4C2 * 2C2= 48 total combinations with at least 1 pair going wrong. So total acceptable combinations = (90-48)/90 = 46%
you're almost correct regarding the 90 possible ways, but you need to consider the ordering of the pairs. the number of possible ways is 90 ÷ 3! or just 15.
@@christianmiller.MathTeacher Thank you! the actual combination is only 15. But since i took the same combinations (with order) in both total and wrong pairs, 46% still holds true. Other words, from 15 possible ways, 8 pairs are not accepted, so 15-8/15 = 46%
Does being a Quant Trader require a CS degree or a MBA? Quant trader develops complex trading algorithms, so is it CS that is mandatory or since it involves heavy quant and mathematics, it needs MBA?
I solved q1 by realizing that left shoes 4l, 5l, 6l match with the right shoes only when 6r follows 4r - 4r5r6r, 5r4r6r, 4r6r5r. So the chance of getting three acceptable pairs is 1/2. Where did I go wrong?
@@ishangupta2380I also got two ways of interpreting the problem, and got 1/2 and 1/5. for the answer to be 1/2, a pair of shoes must be Left and Right. I posted a long analysis for the answer to be 1/5 on the main thread. thanks for your reply here .. I thought I was going nuts when I got to the end of their solutions, AND I'm a math teacher !
It was obvious that it was 1 third b.c of the complement but why did he reason it using the factorials instead of just fractionalizing it? Only possibility of picking the bad pair is 2/6 then just adjust. This took 45 seconds in my head or did i just get lucky on 33% and my reasoning was faulty?
the solution to the first problem i can understand, but no way would i be able to do it under time pressure; you just count all possible 6 shoe configurations, 6! in total (720) and since they are all equally likely you just count the valid ones. But once you start counting i feel like with the stress of an interview itd be very easy to mess it up and get nervous and lose track of what youre doing.
The complement strategy the guy uses is pretty terrible. The most efficient way to do the complement strategy is to use inclusion-exclusion e.g. P(A or B) = P(A) + P(B) - P(A and B). Denote A as a1 paired with c1 or c2, denote B as a2 paired with c1 or c2. Thus P(A) = P(B) = 1/5+1/5 = 2/5. Then for P(A and B), utilize Bayes theorem in the way that is noted at the end of problem 1, e.g. P(a1 paired with c1 or c2) * P(a2 paired with remaining c1 or c2 | a1 paired with c1 or c2) which evaluates to 2/5*1/3 = 2/15. The solution then is 2/5+2/5 - 2/15 which = 10/15. Then to get P(acceptable pair), you just do 1-P(unacceptable pair) which = 1 - 10/15 = 5/15 = 1/3. Elegant solution.
@@jeddyxie224 my comment was more about myself than anything else. i dont do too well under time pressure (unfortunately, since i think its quite a good thing if you can manage it), so i was just stating that id probably fail that test. im sure theres all sorts of elegant ways of solving these problems, but in this context i think its most important to solve them within the time limit.
Total cases = 6!. We can select (a1, c1) as one of the pairs. This would give us 3*2*4! ways to select atleast 1 invalid pair. Similarly, (a1, c2) would give us 3*2*4!. This would give a total of 2/5. Now, we are only left with 2 conditions that have not been taken into account and where there is possibility of invalid pairs being selected: (a1, b1) and (a1, b2). In each of these conditions we would get 4*4! ways to select at least 1 invalid pairs. With (a1, b1) we must have either (a2, c1) or (a2, c2). Similar cases would be there for (a1, b2). Thus, we get (2*4*4!)/6! = 4/15. Only valid pairs probability = 1 - (2/5 + 4/15) = 1/3
Another way to do the first problem: there are really only 15 unique ways of choosing pairs. Let's label the shoes 4a, 4b, 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b. First we choose the partner for 4a; there are 5 choices. Now there are 4 shoes left. Now take the first one of those and choose it's partner; there are 3 choices. Now there are 2 shoes left, so there are no more choices to make. 5*3=15. So there are few enough possibilities to just think through them all. If 4a is paired with 4b, we are guaranteed to succeed, so that is 3 ways to succeed, depending on how the other shoes are paired. If 4a is paired with 5a, then 4b must be paired with 5b. And if 4a is paired with 5b, then 4b must be paired with 5a. That is 2 more ways to succeed. If 4a is paired with 6a or 6b, we have already failed. So there are 5 ways to succeed out of 15, or a 1/3 chance.
They didn’t miss anything. Their solution is the cleanest solution out of all the ones discussed here, including the one used by the person in the video
You know what the fucked up thing is, the person asking the questions out loud to the interviewee doesn’t know the answer themselves and they are in the company, where as if interviewee doesn’t get them right he’s immediately dropped.
For the first problem the answer can not be 1/3 because the total acceptable combinations is 11 and the total combinations is 15 so the correct answer should be closer to 1 than to 0. The correct answer is 11/15.
This is incorrect. First, the shoes are not replaceable, meaning after every acceptable pair is drawn the probability of drawing another acceptable pair decreases. So it cannot be closer to one than zero. The odds of 3 acceptable pairs being drawn in a row in your example with 15 pairs is ~ 32%. Math: (11/15) x (9/13) x (7/11). 2 removed from numerator and denominator every time an acceptable pair is drawn. So basically 1/3. Also, there are only 9 acceptable pairs. You are viewing this from the perspective that each individual shoe is unique. Ex: A 45 pair can have 2 variations with the first 4 shoe being with the first 5 or the second 5. This is redundant as they are the same. Imagine I laid out for you 4 pens. 2 of them are red, 2 of them are blue. Using your way of thinking, there would be 6 pairs. But really, there are only 4 distinctive pairs you could create. You are focused more on the individual pieces, rather than the overall pairs.
@@yaboi608 This is also incorrect. The answer is exactly 1/3. Firstly, your way of removing 2 from numerator and denominator is incorrect. Suppose the first pair picked was (4,5), then remaining shoes are (4, 5, 6, 6). These now have 4 acceptable pairs ((4,5), (5,6), (5,6), (6,6)) and 5 total pairs (and now if we had picked (5,6) then there are 0 acceptable pairs for the last choice, but there would be 1 acceptable pair had we chosen (4,5) which also shows why this subtraction would not work). I have provided my calculation below which can be verified by a simple python script: Total Number of ways to sample 3 pairs from the given 6 shoes: 6C2 * 4C2 * 2C2 = 90 Now, let us find the number of ways to sample 3 pairs such that at least 1 pair is unacceptable. The only unacceptable pair is (4,6). Number of ways to get (4,6) is 2C2 * 2C2 = 4. For the remaining 2 pairs we have 4C2 * 2C2 = 6 options. This (4,6) pair can be permuted within the 3 pairs in 3C1 = 3 ways. Thus, total is 4 * 6 * 3 = 72 such ways. But this overcounts samples like ((4,6), (4,6), (5,5)). So we must subtract number of samples where at least 2 pairs are unacceptable. In this sample we will have 2 pairs of (4,6). Ways to generate the first (4,6) is 4 as above. The second (4,6) has only 1 way to be generated. And for the last pair we have 2C2 = 1 option again. These two (4,6) pairs can be permuted in 3C2 = 3 ways. Thus, total is 4 * 3 = 12. (Technically using PIE we should add back number of ways to draw 3 samples such that at least 3 of them are (4,6) but that number is 0) Thus total number of ways to draw 3 pairs where at least one is unacceptable is 72 - 12 = 60. Thus, number of ways to draw 3 pairs where all are acceptable is 90 - 60 = 30. And the probability is 30/90 = 1/3.
The most efficient way to do the complement strategy is to use inclusion-exclusion e.g. P(A or B) = P(A) + P(B) - P(A and B). Denote A as a1 paired with c1 or c2, denote B as a2 paired with c1 or c2. Thus P(A) = P(B) = 1/5+1/5 = 2/5. Then for P(A and B), utilize Bayes theorem in the way that is noted at the end of problem 1, e.g. P(a1 paired with c1 or c2) * P(a2 paired with remaining c1 or c2 | a1 paired with c1 or c2) which evaluates to 2/5*1/3 = 2/15. The solution then is 2/5+2/5 - 2/15 which = 10/15. Then to get P(acceptable pair), you just do 1-P(unacceptable pair) which = 1 - 10/15 = 5/15 = 1/3. Elegant solution.
Very good video! I have USDT in my OKX wallet and I have my recovery phrase. 「pride」-「pole」-「obtain」-「together」-「second」-「when」-「future」-「mask」-「review」-「nature」-「potato」-「bulb」 How do I transfer them to Binance?
just IQ selection, but you can learn these types of problems by doing them over and over again so it doesn't really work anymore. so now they weed out indians by letting you do stuff like 80in8
That's actually a good point. But if a selection is valid, each of its permutations (changing what is left/right for all 3 pairs) should also be valid. This also holds true if a selection is invalid. So I don't think this should affect the answer.
I'm sorry but I don't think that this guy took in accountability that there's a left and a right shoe, if a left is paired with a left the pair isn't correct right ?
Am i the only one that did the first question differently ? Probably incorrect but i got the correct answer. If youre asked to select 50% of the population and you have a 33% chance of each shoe than you just take 33% of 50 in this case its 66% cause they said you can go up or down a size and it would still match .66•50%= 33% 😅 quicker easier and less panicked
Are you sure trading is really about probability? I’ve heard of high-frequency trading companies using questionable tactics like naked shorting, buying retail trader data from platforms, or even stealing orders from big traders and selling them back immediately. It’s surprising because even highly intelligent people, like those with math or physics Olympiad backgrounds working in big financial institutions, sometimes struggle to make money trading on their own. Instead, they seem to rely on their positions to front-run their company’s large orders.
I will be forever grateful to you, you changed my entire life and I will continue to preach on your behalf for the whole world to hear you saved me from huge financial debt with just a small investment, thank you Veronica Hoy.
Wow. I'm a bit perplexed seeing her been mentioned here also Didn’t know she has been good to so many people too this is wonderful, I'm in my fifth trade with her and it has been super.
She is my family's personal Broker and also a personal Broker to many families in the United states, she is a licensed broker and a FINRA AGENT in the United States.
Because successful trading is about finding statistical edges in the market. Every professional trading system or model has probability as a key parameter
I think they missed a pair of two lefts (or two rights) as invalid. So, if the number of permutations of 6 shoes taking 2 at a time are 15: Pick 1. "L4" "L4" "L4" "L4" "L4" "R4" "R4" "R4" "R4" "L5" "L5" "L5" "R5" "R5" "L6" Pick 2. "R4" "L5" "R5" "L6" "R6" "L5" "R5" "L6" "R6" "R5" "L6" "R6" "L6" "R6" "R6" The valid ones are those who meet the minimum size difference, but also are from a different foot. There are 7 possibilities: Pick 1. "L4" "L4" "R4" "L5" "L5" "R5" "L6" Pick 2. "R4" "R5" "L5" "R5" "R6" "L6" "R6" Which makes the probability of getting a valid pair to 46% I believe you must also have the context onto consideration.
math provides powerful tools and frameworks. But unless those tools are combined with contextual knowledge, reliable data, and an awareness of human elements, the best formulas in the world can still lead us astray.
Maybe someone can help me with this, but the answer to the first one doesn't make much sense to me. The total number of pairs one can make from 6 objects is 6 choose 2 (6C2), which is 15. This should be the size of our sample space. Finding the number of ways that we get an invalid set is trivial, so if we have the set configured like the instructor had it at 8:16 , then we have the set {a1, a2, b1, b2, c1, c2}. What we need to know is how many ways can we pair the a's to the c's to get our number of invalid set. We can easily see that this number is 4, or computationally it could be 4 choose 2, and then subtracting the instances where we get a1,a2 and c1,c2 in order to get 4 examples of an invalid pair. It then follows that our probability for an invalid pair is 4/15, or 0.26666 for a single pair-making trial. So then our complement of this event is 15/15 - 4/15 = 11/15, aka the probability of selecting a valid pair of shoes. The probability that when performing the pair selection process 3 times, with all three being valid pairs, then ought to be (11/15)^3, as the events are independent, pairs are being selected at the same time as one another. That figure comes out to be 0.39437037037, which in my mind is the correct answer to the question.
I took y'alls program last year and landed a quant internship this summer at a tier 1. Def the best interview prep content out there.
Thanks for the kind note, and glad to hear it. Congrats!
- Alex, Quant Researcher
Hello, where can I find the Quant Program?
Thank you.
@@blubanister Visit www.quantblueprint.com to get immediate access!
Hi please can you tell me how to prep for an internship for such a position. Would love to start learning on my own
"Look at him! That's my quant. My quantitative! My math specialist. Look at him. Do you notice anything different about him? Look at his face...look at his eyes! His name is Yang. He won a national math competition in CHINA and he doesn't even speak English! Yeah, I'm sure of the math..."
- Jared Vennett (the Big Short 2015)
😂 my thoughts exactly
Broooo😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Ted Jiang : [to camera] Actually, my name's Jiang and I do speak English. Jared likes to say I don't because he thinks it makes me seem more authentic. And I got second in that national math competition.
😂😂😂
"thats pretty racist" - mark baum
It helps to have such a messy white board in the background to give the illusion you use it a ton.
Especially with the multi colour markers😂
I thought it was a painting
I am flattered that the algorithm gave me this video but I'm really more of a memecoin person. Thank you though.
these quant dudes are insanely intelligent, im about to take a part time masters in quant finance and the notes are looking tough af
you got this bro. good luck!
yea ion think ima get the job
"Ion" and "ima" is pretty much a giveaway
@@ramsesp5009 yeah the comment was a joke, you can't be that stupid to not detect that
@@ramsesp5009 RACIST
@@ramsesp5009 wdym?
@@ramsesp5009bro thinks he's the citadel hiring manager 😂😂😂
I’m still listening at the 1st question for the 21th times, like convincing myself that if I understand the question I can instantly find the answer
there is a much simpler way of approaching it using the naive definition of probability.
How many possible "good" pairings are there? well we have the following:
{ (4,4), (5,5), (6, 6), (5, 6), (5 , 4) }. Since we're only looking at unique sets, our denominator should be the total possible number of ways we can make distinct sets of 2 from 6 objects. This is by definition the binomial coefficient (the choose operator). We have 6 Choose 2 = 15.
5/15 = 1/3
@@nu-tralgreat explanation. Can you do same with the 2nd question. Much appreciated
@@nu-tral you got the right answer with wrong working by luck, C(6,2) counts the number of ways to choose a single distinct pair from 6 distinct objects. The total number of ways to choose 3 distinct pairs from 6 distinct objects is 6!/[(2!)^3*3!] =15. This is because if we imagine 6 places in a line with the position (1,2)(3,4)(5,6) forming pairs, we first do all possible permutation of 6 objects across this places, but we don’t care about order within a pair, so divide total by 2! three times, then we don’t care how we order the pairs, ie, we don’t care if one pair comes before another or after, since we have 3 pairs, divide by 3!.
Then you count how to uniquely choose legal pairs, conditioning on if the size 5s are together or not, which is 1 if they are, +2 for if (5,4) and +2 for (5,6) which is 1+2+2=5. So total 5/15
For the last problem, introduce two states. One where we have balls in one of the buckets and one where we have balls in two of them. We know before flipping the coin that we will have at least one ball so put it in any bucket, we will then be in the first state described above. Now the game can be formulated as follows, whenever we toss a tails randomly add a ball to one of the three buckets and whenever we flip a heads we stop and see if all three buckets are full. The probability of winning this game (the game ending with all buckets full) is equivalent to the formulation in the video. We now see that the possible moves from state 1 are: to losing, back to state 1 or to state 2 and possible transitions from state 2 are: to losing, back to state 2 or winning. Now assign probabilities, p1 and p2, of us winning given that we are in state 1 and 2 respectively (this makes sense as the game has no memory, i.e the probability of winning from a given state is always the same). We know that p1 = 1/2*0 + 1/2*1/3*p1 + 1/2*2/3*p2. (Half of the time we flip a head and lose (only 1 bucket is full), the other half we add a ball randomly to our buckets. 1/3 of the time this will be to the bucket that is already full and 2/3 into one of the other 2 moving us to state 2). Similarly we get that p2 = 1/2*0 + 1/2*1/3 + 1/2*2/3*p2 (here one could talk about a winning state but it's not really necessary. The point is once we reach it we know we will win the game) implying p2=1/4. From the first equation p1 =2/5*p2 and we finally get p1=1/10.
This might seem complicated when formulated in a comment like this but the methodology is really powerful and can be used for a wide range of problems. Almost always when you get an infinite sum in your solution the problem could've been formulated with states and implicit formulas would've given you the answer in a much neater fashion.
We were made to hunt boars and die at 40. How do I uninstall this dlc
start by counting your hunting success rate and maybe everything would start to make sense
xD i think you can still do those things
same ugh
Born to jest, forced to joust kinda energy
You were not made to do anything
Thanks for making this video! This is super helpful.
Glad it was helpful!
@@TheQuantGuide Are you on linkedin?
Get immediate access to our #1 quant interview preparation course at www.QuantBlueprint.com and break into firms like Jane Street, Citadel, HRT, and more.
You could say there are four possible arrangements with three producing those 3 acceptable pairs (ap). Therefore, 75% of the time you will get a pairing that satisfies the ap requirement. Another way to explain this is using the 1/3 fraction they used in the film, however I would write it 3/1. This is because I consider this like a step-up transformer formula. There are 3 conditions that work and 1 that doesn't. The 1st condition (1) is the primary coil and the 2nd condition (3) is the secondary coil. A step up transformer boosts power and because there are 3 positive outcomes to 1 negative outcome we know it is more likely to get the ap we want. Always divide the secondary coils by primary for the step-up calculation. So, 3/1 = 3. It all depends on how you look at things.
Yeah that's what I was thinking, most of these comments are way off the mark.
What always helps me when dealing with events is to always imagine a branching graph of possible transitions over all combos and resulting outcomes. Kinda limited markovian chain. When you see that graph it much easier to understand the simple idea of arithmetic for probability finding.
that's my quant
MY QUANTITATIVE
@@airheadmrng MY MATH SPECIALIST
LOOK AT HIS EYES 😂
YOU NOTICE ANYTHING DIFFERENT ABOUT HIM
I'll give you a hint, his name is Yang !
Now Im not sure if it’s math or English that I’m terrible at
More elegant way to do the last question is to view each toss as going to bin A, B, C or ending the game with probss 1/6,1/6,1/6,3/6. wlog A gets the first ball. P(B empty) = P(fill B before ending) = 3/4. P(B, C both empty) = 3/5. Inclusion-exclusion -> P(B or C empty) = 2*3/4 - 3/5 = 9/10.
I dont doubt your logic, but how do you arrive at the 3/4 and 3/5 probs?
@@Ten_Eleven_Twelve_Thirteen P(event X happens before event Y) = P(event X happens | event X or event Y happens) = P(X) / [P(X) + P(Y)], so e.g. the 3/4 comes from 3/6 / [3/6 + 1/6] = 3 / [1+3]. I think I meant to write P(end before filling B) in the above btw.
How does the answer change if we think that balls are identical? Or does it change at all?
@@justlogical9846 it doesn't i think
Jesus no wonder Ive lost all my money
lmaoooo
Lmao!!😂
Citadel makes most of its money buying then front running retail order flow. No math needed.
@@Rainy_Day12234ur stupid if u think this is true
@@Rainy_Day12234 Can you explain this in detail, please?
I remember reading Michael’s Lewis’ book about SBF and FTX. The section about SBF’s interview at Jane street was pretty fascinating. Quant’s have an interesting mind.
Look at him, that's my quant, my quantitative.
That is kinda racy(st)
And he doesnt know english and cant speak english 😛
He was supposed to close his eyes and answer the probability!!
Real quants don't blink, answer immediately, and then slap the table to summon more questions
Maam i just wanna work at McDonald's as part time
i already do. You can join my team. Can you handle a spatula? Then you are hired. That's our only requirement.
*Wendy's
Q1 can be done in an easier way. the number of possible pairs is we pair the first shoes with 5 shoes, then the next one with 3 shoes and last 1 with the remaining shoe. (so there are5x3x1=15 total pairs). now the allowed ones are (using the provided notation) a1a2,b1b2,c1,c2 and then a1a2,b1c1,b2c2 or a1a2,b1c2,b2c1 (and for these last 2 we multiply them by 2 so that we get the cases where a's and b's mix). so in total 5/15 = 1/3 are allowed.
Are we ignoring the fact that each left shoe must be paired with only a right shoe?
@@sparshailawadi7129wasn't stated in the question
True. But how would this affect Eugene Levy's character from "Best In Show" ?
First question: 1/5 * 2/3 + 1/5 * 1/3 = 1/5 (left and right shoes).
3 pairs of 6 shoes, no replacement. Fix the first shoe, you have 5 options left. Only 2 of those make a valid pair, and once chosen fist valid pair, remaining has 2/3 and 1/3 prob for each choice
You failed
The whiteboard behind shows how much this guy has been practicing for this interview. Shaolin temple monk practicing martial arts comes to mind :S
initial reaction was around 60% probability due to number of valid pairs (2) over the total pairs (3)
2/3x100
this video just called me dumb for a solid 23:22 mins
does the quant think shorting GME is the play?
"Question 1: You find yourself in a position where you need to short $GME due to market demand from peasant retail investors, and there are no shares available in the market to open short positions on legally to offset this buy pressure, but this must be done otherwise our entire business model will be liquidated. Do you know how to hit 'F3' on a keyboard?"
GME doesn’t trade based off fundamentals. That is a stupid question.
@@kurtisbobke9000 tick tock
Lmfao
@@kurtisbobke9000 quant is not stupid
This seemed like a really weird way to say how many invalid sets can be made and whats the probability randomly selecting a valid set from all possible sets. The selection bit trips people up a lot. It doesnt matter because everything gets paired. Its really just asking of all possible sets of {445566}, imagine all the valid {(45),(54),66)} and invalid sets {(64),(64),(55)} (*2 ways this could happen*) - were written on a scraps of paper and thrown in a bag, whats the chance of picking out a scrap that had a valid set, or what is the probability of not picking a scrap that has (46) or (64) in any of the 3 pairings. If the bag had every variation of A1A2.. how many scraps would have AC pairings in any of the 3 pairs (A1C1, A1C2, A2C1, A2C2).
Yeah really can't stand people in the industry they're over paid & can't stand people not in the industry cause they have no desire to learn the basic arithmetic that would allow them to escape their indefinite indentured servitude.
@@bobthebuilder9416 can you elaborate please?
there are 6C2 = 15 possible ways to make a pair. The only acceptable pairs are [4,4] [5,5] [6,6] [5,6] [5,4] which is 5 in total. 5/15 = 1/3 done
Despite all the combinatorial details and potential double-counting pitfalls, the final probability that you randomly form 3 acceptable pairs (where each pair differs by at most 1 shoe size) is:1/3
Citadel will hire him and make him naked short GameStop Stock
Closed my eyes and came up with 1/3 as the answer to the first question. When he started talking, I thought to myself wow I’m way off I didn’t do any of that. Then he finalized the answer at 1/3. Either he over complicated it, or I got lucky.
Nope, it’s just more of that “show your work” bullsh*t.
I have the same problem. My math teacher used to ask me well how do you know you are right? How do you check? I said that's not my job here. My job is to answer for you to check😆 It's cursed blessings my friend.
Here's how I thought about the first problem:
Consider a size 4 shoe, without loss of generality assume it's the left shoe. Then, there are 3 right shoes to match it with, sizes 4, 5 and 6.
So the chance we match the size 4 left shoe satisfactorily is 2/3.
Now consider the size 4 right shoe. Since we already matched the size 4 left shoe, There are only 2 left shoes to match it with, sizes 5 and 6.
The chance we match the size 4 right shoe satisfactorily is 1/2.
So the chance we match both shoes correctly is (2/3)*(1/2) = 1/3
Quant Trading isn't even a thing in my country, but I keep watching this 😂
one of the approach for the first problem (maybe the easiest approach for a generalised case and this particular imo) p(n) respresent to number of ways to pair 1,2,3..,n among 1,2,3...n such that they all are acceptable, so p(n) = p(n-1)/(2*n-1)+2*p(n-2)/(2*n-1)(2*n-3) because there is a 1/n-1 probability to pair n->n(the remaining independent probability would be p(n-1)) and 2/(2*n-1)(2*n-3) probability to pair n->n-1 and n-> n-1 (remaining probabilty depends on independent probability of p(n-2)) the base case for this reccurence woould be p(0) = 1 p(1) = 1 this would result in p(3) = 1/3 which is the answer hope this helps!!!!
Beautiful
For the first question, I have an issue with the answer proposed by the student : he decides to put an order on how shoes are picked. For example, in his reasoning, he distinguishes (a1,a2) with (a2, a1). But, to me, such pairs are the same. Am I wrong ? Should such cases be distinguished ?
You can count either way assuming each shoe of a size is different or not, as long as you stay consistent. Total combinations is 6!/2^3, as opposed to permutations of 6!
i worked as a quant at optiver for 3 years in the us office in chicago. These questions are entirely expected at an interview. You won't be doing this shit for work tho. These foundational skills help give you the ability to seek out patterns and signals within data but at the end of the day, your whole job wont just be maths -- you'll have actual projects to complete.
Honestly just make sure you can program pretty decently -- especially with asynchronous programming, data science libs (like numpy, pandas, etc), and the like
Like...?
Why did you stop working there?
@average391” and the like” means “and other similar things “
what you do now would love to hear about it
I found another way that I used. Basically for the shoe problem if there is a difference of 1, you can take 2/6C2 and for the same size you have only 3 outcomes so it is 3/6C2 and they are both equal to 2/15 and 3/15 respectively. Their sum isj ust 5/15 = 1/3
Yeah i did something similar and got 1/3rd too. The jane street questions seem way more absurd than this.
I'm a bit rusty on these but dont we need to exclude k = 1 and k = 2? If we have less than 3 balls then the probability of having an empty bin is 100%. So in the geometric series we should exclude the first 2 values in our summation
You take the complement so they are automatically excluded
Question 1 I don’t think you mentioned anything about right and left shoes being a requirement for an acceptable pair, so 2 right shoes, size 4 and 5 would be acceptable?
There is always a HARD code test. Where is the HARD code test?
The solution for the first question is wrong. Each show has left and right, you can’t pair left and left on any size. There are much fewer possible combinations. Luckily the answer is still 2/3 but candidate and interviewer misinterpreted the question.
this might be a dumb question but doesn't the probability change if the first pick if 4/6 vs 5. just because the two 5s matched doesn't mean that the next two pairs are acceptable.
I drew a blank on the probably question I’ve forgotten the formula for probability!
We did this math in high school. Classic AMC / KMC questions
For the Q1 for shoe pairs, the provided answer doesn't look to be correct. There is a total of 90 combinations - 6C2 * 4C2 * 2C2 and 8 pairs are not accepted which are (a being left foot and b right foot) - 6a with 5a, 4a, 4b And 6b with 5b, 4a, 4b And 5a, 4a And 5b, 4b. So all the combination with these 8 pairs will have to discarded as unacceptable, which gives 8 * 4C2 * 2C2= 48 total combinations with at least 1 pair going wrong. So total acceptable combinations = (90-48)/90 = 46%
you're almost correct regarding the 90 possible ways, but you need to consider the ordering of the pairs.
the number of possible ways is 90 ÷ 3! or just 15.
@@christianmiller.MathTeacher Thank you! the actual combination is only 15. But since i took the same combinations (with order) in both total and wrong pairs, 46% still holds true. Other words, from 15 possible ways, 8 pairs are not accepted, so 15-8/15 = 46%
Does being a Quant Trader require a CS degree or a MBA?
Quant trader develops complex trading algorithms, so is it CS that is mandatory or since it involves heavy quant and mathematics, it needs MBA?
Statisitics or Data Science should be okay
Well done
but what about 4 an d6 possibility of . what of the 6 isd nto the 4 and the coreALtion of sizes ar e nto the corelation of pairs
What does this have to do with stocks. Ask why social media platforms were shunned and blocked people’s from talking about certain subjects.
These problems feel like simple textbook exercises. I think real interview will require more clever tricks.
Literally interviewed at Citadel for qt yesterday and they asked questions like this lol
@@AC-vp8fb How'd it go
I solved q1 by realizing that left shoes 4l, 5l, 6l match with the right shoes only when 6r follows 4r - 4r5r6r, 5r4r6r, 4r6r5r. So the chance of getting three acceptable pairs is 1/2. Where did I go wrong?
Yeah their answer is wrong it would either be 1/2 or 1/5 ( if we count left left combo as an illegitimate pair for our calculations)
@@ishangupta2380I also got two ways of interpreting the problem, and got 1/2 and 1/5.
for the answer to be 1/2, a pair of shoes must be Left and Right.
I posted a long analysis for the answer to be 1/5 on the main thread.
thanks for your reply here .. I thought I was going nuts when I got to the end of their solutions, AND I'm a math teacher !
I think 1/3 is pretty intuitive without calculating
It was obvious that it was 1 third b.c of the complement but why did he reason it using the factorials instead of just fractionalizing it? Only possibility of picking the bad pair is 2/6 then just adjust. This took 45 seconds in my head or did i just get lucky on 33% and my reasoning was faulty?
Idk man all i know is that i can spam the F5 button the fastest 😂
I don't even understand the question
thats 73 times of bumping on the desk in total
Seems weird not to consider that a valid pair of shoes needs to consist of one left and one right....
the solution to the first problem i can understand, but no way would i be able to do it under time pressure;
you just count all possible 6 shoe configurations, 6! in total (720) and since they are all equally likely you just count the valid ones. But once you start counting i feel like with the stress of an interview itd be very easy to mess it up and get nervous and lose track of what youre doing.
The complement strategy the guy uses is pretty terrible. The most efficient way to do the complement strategy is to use inclusion-exclusion e.g. P(A or B) = P(A) + P(B) - P(A and B). Denote A as a1 paired with c1 or c2, denote B as a2 paired with c1 or c2. Thus P(A) = P(B) = 1/5+1/5 = 2/5. Then for P(A and B), utilize Bayes theorem in the way that is noted at the end of problem 1, e.g. P(a1 paired with c1 or c2) * P(a2 paired with remaining c1 or c2 | a1 paired with c1 or c2) which evaluates to 2/5*1/3 = 2/15. The solution then is 2/5+2/5 - 2/15 which = 10/15. Then to get P(acceptable pair), you just do 1-P(unacceptable pair) which = 1 - 10/15 = 5/15 = 1/3. Elegant solution.
@@jeddyxie224 my comment was more about myself than anything else. i dont do too well under time pressure (unfortunately, since i think its quite a good thing if you can manage it), so i was just stating that id probably fail that test. im sure theres all sorts of elegant ways of solving these problems, but in this context i think its most important to solve them within the time limit.
Total cases = 6!. We can select (a1, c1) as one of the pairs. This would give us 3*2*4! ways to select atleast 1 invalid pair. Similarly, (a1, c2) would give us 3*2*4!. This would give a total of 2/5. Now, we are only left with 2 conditions that have not been taken into account and where there is possibility of invalid pairs being selected: (a1, b1) and (a1, b2). In each of these conditions we would get 4*4! ways to select at least 1 invalid pairs. With (a1, b1) we must have either (a2, c1) or (a2, c2). Similar cases would be there for (a1, b2). Thus, we get (2*4*4!)/6! = 4/15. Only valid pairs probability = 1 - (2/5 + 4/15) = 1/3
I got to admit, I'm confused on the last question with flipping a coin and bins being empty.
should not the last question be 2/2^k?
Another way to do the first problem: there are really only 15 unique ways of choosing pairs. Let's label the shoes 4a, 4b, 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b. First we choose the partner for 4a; there are 5 choices. Now there are 4 shoes left. Now take the first one of those and choose it's partner; there are 3 choices. Now there are 2 shoes left, so there are no more choices to make. 5*3=15. So there are few enough possibilities to just think through them all. If 4a is paired with 4b, we are guaranteed to succeed, so that is 3 ways to succeed, depending on how the other shoes are paired. If 4a is paired with 5a, then 4b must be paired with 5b. And if 4a is paired with 5b, then 4b must be paired with 5a. That is 2 more ways to succeed. If 4a is paired with 6a or 6b, we have already failed. So there are 5 ways to succeed out of 15, or a 1/3 chance.
I think that you missed the word "random" in the task definition. You can't "chose", you toss the cube
They didn’t miss anything. Their solution is the cleanest solution out of all the ones discussed here, including the one used by the person in the video
@@mibli2935 he's not choosing. he just listed out every single possibility and of those possibilities, only 1/3 satisfy the condition.
@@mibli2935No she’s right this is math not philosophy
@@mibli2935shes basically writing out all the cases in the bayes approach. shes right, its essentially the same as the second solution.
You know what the fucked up thing is, the person asking the questions out loud to the interviewee doesn’t know the answer themselves and they are in the company, where as if interviewee doesn’t get them right he’s immediately dropped.
I wonder why he didn't used permutations and combinations formula🤷♂️
He definitely won that math olympiad in china
second part: 3:22
For the first problem the answer can not be 1/3 because the total acceptable combinations is 11 and the total combinations is 15 so the correct answer should be closer to 1 than to 0. The correct answer is 11/15.
Legit
This is incorrect. First, the shoes are not replaceable, meaning after every acceptable pair is drawn the probability of drawing another acceptable pair decreases. So it cannot be closer to one than zero. The odds of 3 acceptable pairs being drawn in a row in your example with 15 pairs is ~ 32%. Math: (11/15) x (9/13) x (7/11). 2 removed from numerator and denominator every time an acceptable pair is drawn. So basically 1/3.
Also, there are only 9 acceptable pairs. You are viewing this from the perspective that each individual shoe is unique. Ex: A 45 pair can have 2 variations with the first 4 shoe being with the first 5 or the second 5. This is redundant as they are the same. Imagine I laid out for you 4 pens. 2 of them are red, 2 of them are blue. Using your way of thinking, there would be 6 pairs. But really, there are only 4 distinctive pairs you could create. You are focused more on the individual pieces, rather than the overall pairs.
@@yaboi608 This is also incorrect. The answer is exactly 1/3. Firstly, your way of removing 2 from numerator and denominator is incorrect. Suppose the first pair picked was (4,5), then remaining shoes are (4, 5, 6, 6). These now have 4 acceptable pairs ((4,5), (5,6), (5,6), (6,6)) and 5 total pairs (and now if we had picked (5,6) then there are 0 acceptable pairs for the last choice, but there would be 1 acceptable pair had we chosen (4,5) which also shows why this subtraction would not work). I have provided my calculation below which can be verified by a simple python script:
Total Number of ways to sample 3 pairs from the given 6 shoes: 6C2 * 4C2 * 2C2 = 90
Now, let us find the number of ways to sample 3 pairs such that at least 1 pair is unacceptable. The only unacceptable pair is (4,6). Number of ways to get (4,6) is 2C2 * 2C2 = 4. For the remaining 2 pairs we have 4C2 * 2C2 = 6 options. This (4,6) pair can be permuted within the 3 pairs in 3C1 = 3 ways. Thus, total is 4 * 6 * 3 = 72 such ways.
But this overcounts samples like ((4,6), (4,6), (5,5)). So we must subtract number of samples where at least 2 pairs are unacceptable. In this sample we will have 2 pairs of (4,6). Ways to generate the first (4,6) is 4 as above. The second (4,6) has only 1 way to be generated. And for the last pair we have 2C2 = 1 option again. These two (4,6) pairs can be permuted in 3C2 = 3 ways. Thus, total is 4 * 3 = 12.
(Technically using PIE we should add back number of ways to draw 3 samples such that at least 3 of them are (4,6) but that number is 0)
Thus total number of ways to draw 3 pairs where at least one is unacceptable is 72 - 12 = 60.
Thus, number of ways to draw 3 pairs where all are acceptable is 90 - 60 = 30. And the probability is 30/90 = 1/3.
@@yaboi608but in quant isn't accuracy stressed on, how come you're gonna say 1/3 instead of 32%
qtπ, what's your name?
is 8/15 the answer for the first question, im just calculate it in my head, sorry if im wrong
The most efficient way to do the complement strategy is to use inclusion-exclusion e.g. P(A or B) = P(A) + P(B) - P(A and B). Denote A as a1 paired with c1 or c2, denote B as a2 paired with c1 or c2. Thus P(A) = P(B) = 1/5+1/5 = 2/5. Then for P(A and B), utilize Bayes theorem in the way that is noted at the end of problem 1, e.g. P(a1 paired with c1 or c2) * P(a2 paired with remaining c1 or c2 | a1 paired with c1 or c2) which evaluates to 2/5*1/3 = 2/15. The solution then is 2/5+2/5 - 2/15 which = 10/15. Then to get P(acceptable pair), you just do 1-P(unacceptable pair) which = 1 - 10/15 = 5/15 = 1/3. Elegant solution.
Very good video! I have USDT in my OKX wallet and I have my recovery phrase. 「pride」-「pole」-「obtain」-「together」-「second」-「when」-「future」-「mask」-「review」-「nature」-「potato」-「bulb」 How do I transfer them to Binance?
What is the point of all these questions? You hardly apply this.
just IQ selection, but you can learn these types of problems by doing them over and over again so it doesn't really work anymore. so now they weed out indians by letting you do stuff like
80in8
We cant wear 2 left sided shoes of suitable size 😅
well, there us a left and a right shoe
That's actually a good point. But if a selection is valid, each of its permutations (changing what is left/right for all 3 pairs) should also be valid. This also holds true if a selection is invalid. So I don't think this should affect the answer.
I'm sorry but I don't think that this guy took in accountability that there's a left and a right shoe, if a left is paired with a left the pair isn't correct right ?
I will just touch the shoes and calculate the size or different kind of pair category to answer the question 😂
This is just statistics?
Students in elementary school in asia can answer this question in 3 seconds..
I literally had the answer 6 seconds after the question was asked
Am i the only one that did the first question differently ? Probably incorrect but i got the correct answer. If youre asked to select 50% of the population and you have a 33% chance of each shoe than you just take 33% of 50 in this case its 66% cause they said you can go up or down a size and it would still match .66•50%= 33% 😅 quicker easier and less panicked
Are you sure trading is really about probability? I’ve heard of high-frequency trading companies using questionable tactics like naked shorting, buying retail trader data from platforms, or even stealing orders from big traders and selling them back immediately. It’s surprising because even highly intelligent people, like those with math or physics Olympiad backgrounds working in big financial institutions, sometimes struggle to make money trading on their own. Instead, they seem to rely on their positions to front-run their company’s large orders.
I will be forever grateful to you, you changed my entire life and I will continue to preach on your behalf for the whole world to hear you saved me from huge financial debt with just a small investment, thank you Veronica Hoy.
Wow. I'm a bit perplexed seeing her been mentioned here also Didn’t know she has been good to so many people too this is wonderful, I'm in my fifth trade with her and it has been super.
She is my family's personal Broker and also a personal Broker to many families in the United states, she is a licensed broker and a FINRA AGENT in the United States.
You trade with Veronica Hoy too? Wow that woman has been a blessing to me and my family.
I'm new at this, please how can I reach her?
I was skeptical at first till I decided to try. Its huge returns is awesome. I can't say much
A:"Ok, so we are going to start off with a comaprison question: What is the difference to a duck?'"
Consulting
all of that to underperform SPY
can someone tell me why such calculations are important for trading ?
Because successful trading is about finding statistical edges in the market. Every professional trading system or model has probability as a key parameter
I think they missed a pair of two lefts (or two rights) as invalid.
So, if the number of permutations of 6 shoes taking 2 at a time are 15:
Pick 1. "L4" "L4" "L4" "L4" "L4" "R4" "R4" "R4" "R4" "L5" "L5" "L5" "R5" "R5" "L6"
Pick 2. "R4" "L5" "R5" "L6" "R6" "L5" "R5" "L6" "R6" "R5" "L6" "R6" "L6" "R6" "R6"
The valid ones are those who meet the minimum size difference, but also are from a different foot. There are 7 possibilities:
Pick 1. "L4" "L4" "R4" "L5" "L5" "R5" "L6"
Pick 2. "R4" "R5" "L5" "R5" "R6" "L6" "R6"
Which makes the probability of getting a valid pair to 46%
I believe you must also have the context onto consideration.
lol That's what I thought too. When he said factorial I was like...this guy is an idiot.
Exactly, that's what I was thinking. They should've used something other than shoes if they intended the question to be answered this way.
Fantastic
The efforts are great, but still i feel maximum audience didn’t get anything my man explained in the video
Agreed
math provides powerful tools and frameworks. But unless those tools are combined with contextual knowledge, reliable data, and an awareness of human elements, the best formulas in the world can still lead us astray.
25%
And HFT is only as good as their being fast/first. There's zero sum and then there's quants.
Bro's a bit anxious. :D
Maybe someone can help me with this, but the answer to the first one doesn't make much sense to me.
The total number of pairs one can make from 6 objects is 6 choose 2 (6C2), which is 15. This should be the size of our sample space. Finding the number of ways that we get an invalid set is trivial, so if we have the set configured like the instructor had it at 8:16 , then we have the set {a1, a2, b1, b2, c1, c2}. What we need to know is how many ways can we pair the a's to the c's to get our number of invalid set. We can easily see that this number is 4, or computationally it could be 4 choose 2, and then subtracting the instances where we get a1,a2 and c1,c2 in order to get 4 examples of an invalid pair.
It then follows that our probability for an invalid pair is 4/15, or 0.26666 for a single pair-making trial. So then our complement of this event is 15/15 - 4/15 = 11/15, aka the probability of selecting a valid pair of shoes. The probability that when performing the pair selection process 3 times, with all three being valid pairs, then ought to be (11/15)^3, as the events are independent, pairs are being selected at the same time as one another. That figure comes out to be 0.39437037037, which in my mind is the correct answer to the question.
Hey,
The second part of your logic would be correct if we are replacing the shoes after picking them.
Can somebody who has gone through the interviews comment on if they are really this easy?
I did Jump Trading internship interview and the questiona where this kind of difficult
@@oscarromero9702 these are easy
Legendary
Bros first question should have been how many shoes are left foot and how many are right.
Two left feet was not taken into consideration