Conditional Probabilities, Clearly Explained!!!

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 17 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 403

  • @statquest
    @statquest  3 роки тому +81

    NOTE: Conditional probabilities can be written two ways: a "long" version and a "short" version. In this video I use the long version (because it's easier for me to read)...
    P(A and B | B) = P(A and B)/P(B)
    ...however, the short version is commonly used...
    P(A | B) = P(A and B)/P(B)
    Both mean the same thing, in other words: P(A and B | B) = P(A | B). The short version implies the "and B" part.
    Support StatQuest by buying my book The StatQuest Illustrated Guide to Machine Learning or a Study Guide or Merch!!! statquest.org/statquest-store/

    • @exploringdiversity572
      @exploringdiversity572 3 роки тому +4

      Your version is much easier for non-statisticians like me :)

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому +8

      @@exploringdiversity572 bam!

    • @chandrashekar316
      @chandrashekar316 8 місяців тому +1

      omg this cleared up so much confusion i had from reading my text book where they were using the shorthand

  • @pomegranate8593
    @pomegranate8593 2 роки тому +206

    I love how I need a video that seems designed for 7 year olds to understand my uni course.
    Great vid thanks

  • @shinej11
    @shinej11 2 роки тому +111

    I always thought I was incapable of learning math, but it had always intrigued me. I just discovered what was missing; a good teacher. Thank you very much.

    • @statquest
      @statquest  2 роки тому +12

      bam!

    • @PastryDonut
      @PastryDonut 2 роки тому +3

      I'm in the same boat as you man, love this channel

  • @asrao3788
    @asrao3788 7 місяців тому +22

    In India due to competition for engineering entrance exam teacher majorly focus on question types rather than concept in depth. Im glad there is a place where people learn for fun not just for competition, also appreiciate teachers like you who can turn subjects into magic. Keep up the good work! From now on I'm permanent on this channel. You are the best!

    • @statquest
      @statquest  7 місяців тому

      Thank you very much!

  • @mikejohns1347
    @mikejohns1347 3 роки тому +34

    I "stumbled" upon the contingency table method many years ago when trying teach myself the basics of probability. This approach is really the only approach for developing a solid understanding of conditional probability, as well as joint and marginal probability. I've never seen anyone present it this way and I'm so glad to see it here! Just more evidence that Josh Starmer is an absolute master instructor.

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому +3

      BAM! Thank you very much! :)

    • @endahfajarwati8336
      @endahfajarwati8336 2 роки тому +1

      you know, me too.

    • @Ash-bc8vw
      @Ash-bc8vw 2 роки тому +1

      Hey this table reminds me of confusion matrix from a ML classification problem

  • @drpkmath12345
    @drpkmath12345 3 роки тому +58

    Very nice video for sure. Conditional prob is one of the topics students feel the most difficulty when they start studying for stat! Great job!

  • @turtle3341
    @turtle3341 2 роки тому +12

    this is how i wish people taught stuff, i really hope these ways of learning statistics get the recognition they deserve! please keep it up !!!!

  • @azinkhodadadi7912
    @azinkhodadadi7912 2 роки тому +9

    I should of paid you instead of my useless lecturer at university! This is so much more useful thank you!

  • @rejithmadhavan5735
    @rejithmadhavan5735 2 роки тому +4

    Logical explanation, precision and genuineness - your way of teaching exemplifies these essential qualities. Thanks so much Josh for these great lessons. Invaluable effort!

  • @baqirhusain5652
    @baqirhusain5652 2 роки тому +3

    You are a GOD of simple explanations

  • @jacob.9664
    @jacob.9664 7 місяців тому +9

    Soda and Candy > Mechanical engineering degree. Thank you it was very helpful!

  • @AndrywMarques
    @AndrywMarques 3 роки тому +8

    Great video!
    I never saw the "long version" to write conditional probabilities before but it's better to understand. Very intuitive!

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому

      Yes, I like it more, too.

  • @siennadae-knight5598
    @siennadae-knight5598 3 місяці тому +3

    Just about started crying when the cartoon-y jingle and graphics started and felt a weight lift off my shoulders when you introduced the contigency table. I have 0 background in prob and stats, always hated the subject, and was terrified it would be impossible for me to learn. None of the symbols made sense to me. The concepts gave me a headache. And I wouldn't even know where to begin asking questions considering no matter how much I seemed to "understand" what my professor was saying in class, the moment I saw a homework question, complete blank. I thought I was doomed to just memorizing formulas that made no sense to me, which isn't a great thing to say as an engineering student.
    Thank you. I've been saved by your channel.

  • @phuctran4679
    @phuctran4679 3 роки тому +3

    Thank you Josh & the team. I'm so grateful I've found your channel. You make me truly love statistics!

  • @jacktaylor1516
    @jacktaylor1516 3 роки тому +2

    This is one of the best explanations of absolutely anything I've ever seen and heard. Well done. Subscribed.

  • @leandroimail
    @leandroimail 2 роки тому +5

    I love these classes. They are so easy to understand. Thks you for sharing with us!

    • @statquest
      @statquest  2 роки тому

      Thank you very much! :)

  • @Florithepenguin
    @Florithepenguin 8 місяців тому +1

    Struggled with this topic literally for years! You solved my problem within just 10 min.! 🎉

  • @Regular.Biceps
    @Regular.Biceps 2 роки тому +2

    Exceptional explanation... I'm Completely in love with your teaching style

  • @IarukaSkYouk
    @IarukaSkYouk 4 місяці тому +2

    I FUCKING HATE PROBABILITIES SO MUCH I ACTUALYL GAVE UP 3 TIMES LEARNING THE COURSE (THE COURSE IS HIGH QUALITY IM JUST VERY STUPID) IM SO SO SO GLAD IM STARTING TO GET IT FROM YOUR VIDEOS JOSH. YOU'RE DEFINITELY THE #1 GUY ON UA-cam.

  • @talentlancer1358
    @talentlancer1358 8 місяців тому +2

    Thank you so much! This is the best video on conditional probability on internet.

  • @dizetoot
    @dizetoot 3 роки тому +3

    THANK YOU! I've really been struggling to get an intuitive understanding of conditional probability and this has helped so much!

  • @HardikBhakhar
    @HardikBhakhar 7 місяців тому +3

    Never thought that to understand conditional probabilities is this easy … thanks prof 🎯

  • @jacktrimboli
    @jacktrimboli 3 роки тому +2

    I get a dopamine rush every time this man says bam

  • @minettelamprecht90
    @minettelamprecht90 2 місяці тому +1

    I am forever in my uni lecturer's debt for being too lazy to explain and instead give us the link to your index!! I need to learn stats as part of my Data Science Programming course, and you have been VERY helpful

    • @statquest
      @statquest  2 місяці тому

      BAM! Good luck with the course!

  • @tyt03538
    @tyt03538 3 роки тому +1

    This is the best video explaining conditional probability. Hands down.

  • @colinirvine757
    @colinirvine757 2 роки тому +3

    Great job Josh!!!!! This is such a clear and precisely laid out video perfect for my students.

  • @arpitkakkar2780
    @arpitkakkar2780 3 роки тому +1

    Awesome. I always come here to get my doubts clear. Love the way you teach. Lots of BAM!!!

  • @buihung3704
    @buihung3704 Рік тому +8

    A 6 years old can understand this. That's genius

  • @tamminh480
    @tamminh480 Місяць тому +1

    cant express how grateful i am to stumble across your channel!!!! I thought I was dumb but not anymore haha

  • @ivlivs.c3666
    @ivlivs.c3666 Рік тому +2

    Incredibly well-explained. Thank you!

  • @AbcdAbcd-ol5hn
    @AbcdAbcd-ol5hn 2 роки тому +1

    😭😭😭😭thanks a lot😭😭😭god bless you, u are doing a noble job, may you get all the riches, love and happiness in the world

    • @statquest
      @statquest  2 роки тому

      Thank you very much! :)

  • @vavy5652
    @vavy5652 2 роки тому +1

    You are literally saving me from my statistics exam! Thank you so much, your explanations are brilliant and you are really making me focus with your simple and funny ways. Thank you again!

  • @between_the_lines6173
    @between_the_lines6173 Рік тому +1

    You're the statistics buddha! The analogies and the calming voice!

  • @prachisharma457
    @prachisharma457 15 днів тому +2

    Omgg I finally understood this
    Bam!!

  • @Oliver-cn5xx
    @Oliver-cn5xx 3 роки тому +4

    Hi Josh, I am a long time fan of your channel and all of the shameless self-promotion has guilted me into buying one of your study guides (LDA). They seem great, a nice supplement to your videos. Though I think you would benefit greatly from stripping down the ordering process, I mean for online purchases almost noone asks for complete addresses, phone numbers and names anymore. I fought very hard with myself to finish it and parting with that information, and I succeeded simply because of being so grateful for the videos you provide.
    You'd probably sell a lot more of these if you just ask for an email. Like most. Cheers

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому +2

      Thanks for the advice! I'll see what I can do to simplify the ordering process.

  • @shamsulazhar
    @shamsulazhar 3 роки тому +2

    Finally, I understand this. BAM!!!!

  • @Nakameguro97
    @Nakameguro97 3 роки тому +3

    Thank you SO MUCH for clarifying that AB = A and B, when A and B are events. I get confused because XY is literally multiplication when X and Y are random variables. It can be doubly confusing because both events and random variables (even though they are different types) can be passed into P(), the probability function. Function overloading is a thing in computer programming, but I’m shocked to see it in math. Also, the implied A and B in P(A | B) is a lifesaver, many times over. BTW, understanding the tables in this video is pivotal in grasping marginal distributions, Baye’s Theorem, and joint probability distributions - it feels like I’m getting the other three concepts for free!

  • @uvofsam
    @uvofsam 3 роки тому +4

    Bam!! , what a bam person to explain everything about statistics so bamly!!

  • @faiazrummankhan5589
    @faiazrummankhan5589 3 роки тому +2

    This channel is the bible of " Making 'Understanding Statistics' Easy !"

  • @LightFlameGamerOP
    @LightFlameGamerOP 28 днів тому +2

    BAM! You just got a new subscriber 😂

  • @onurkrmz9206
    @onurkrmz9206 3 роки тому

    Today I discovered your channel and it is truly a gem. As a EEE student who tries to make sense of subject of probability and neural network stuff, I believe I will benefit a lot from your work and be thankful for rest of my life. Especially statistics is challenging as things get messy a lot and scary/unintuitive equations with confusing notations start to appear. I did not look at all of your videos yet, but I hope that you did statistics less scary for those like me. My best regards

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому

      Awesome! Here's a page that lists all of my videos (and playlists etc): statquest.org/video-index/

  • @dhendroid2373
    @dhendroid2373 3 роки тому +1

    This is how every tutorial should be!

  • @jerryquid4057
    @jerryquid4057 Рік тому +1

    You're incredible. You make everything seem so easy

  • @kekahazra9769
    @kekahazra9769 10 місяців тому +2

    Bam! I like the way you teach.....keep up!....Bam Bam!😅

    • @statquest
      @statquest  10 місяців тому

      Thank you very much! BAM! :)

  • @ShashwatAgarwal007
    @ShashwatAgarwal007 3 роки тому +2

    Happy Guru Purnima Sir, So blessed that this channel exists. ❤️🙏

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому +1

      Thank you! And thank you for supporting StatQuest! BAM! :)

    • @tomr03status99
      @tomr03status99 3 роки тому

      ❤️❤️

  • @dyles1832
    @dyles1832 3 роки тому +3

    The people demand a Montecarlo Simulations StatQuest!!!

    • @justinwhite2725
      @justinwhite2725 3 роки тому +2

      That would be nice.

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому

      I'll keep that in mind. We may get to something like it when I cover bayesian statistics.

    • @tomr03status99
      @tomr03status99 3 роки тому

      That could be nice

  • @anthonyrinna1305
    @anthonyrinna1305 9 місяців тому +1

    First, I'll admit I had "Do you love orange soda?" from Keenan and Kel in the back of my mind. That said, this video has been immensely helpful, thank you!

  • @amribrahim7850
    @amribrahim7850 3 роки тому +1

    Awesome explanation. Thanks to you and Triple Bam members

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому +1

      Glad you liked it! BAM! :)

  • @BARAKABLESSING
    @BARAKABLESSING 2 роки тому +1

    This helped understand c prob. I am taking a mandatory into to stat class with no math experience and passion. Thanks

  • @ahmadatta66
    @ahmadatta66 3 роки тому +1

    "I hate using abbreviations"
    And I love you for that

  • @sillyfarmerbilly8872
    @sillyfarmerbilly8872 3 роки тому +4

    "statsquatch" I love it 😂
    Also I guess I never put together that you could use the probabilities to calculate conditional probabilies, super helpful

  • @tsigeasteraye4485
    @tsigeasteraye4485 5 місяців тому +1

    This is amazing way of explanation!

  • @sanjeevsingh-zz2hg
    @sanjeevsingh-zz2hg Рік тому +1

    Your way of teaching ! Bam!

  • @surendrabarsode8959
    @surendrabarsode8959 3 роки тому +3

    Very well explained as usual!! BTW, do you have any plans for making videos on stochastic calculus topics like Brownian motion, Ito integral, martingale measures etc. If so, I am looking forward to them.

  • @josevaldes7493
    @josevaldes7493 3 роки тому +1

    amazing googleplex BAM! Man you did it again. BRAVO

  • @gabrielasantana3809
    @gabrielasantana3809 3 роки тому +1

    And BAM! I subscribed….such a clear explanation

  • @LukaszWiklendt
    @LukaszWiklendt 3 роки тому +3

    It's interesting notation that you keep the superfluous condition on the left side of the pipe. I.e. using p(c=0 and s=1 | s=1) instead of p(c=0 | s=1). Do you find students understand it better this way?

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому +1

      Yes. To me it is much clearer.

  • @avrilduck8326
    @avrilduck8326 7 місяців тому

    After 4:40, I cried "that's enough" because it was relentless!!

  • @simonroques8579
    @simonroques8579 3 роки тому +1

    Excellent video..again ! So good to be hit by the triple bam !!! 😁

  • @swarnachoppella388
    @swarnachoppella388 3 роки тому +3

    Thank you! Great content always🤩

  • @yujan9103
    @yujan9103 2 роки тому

    Well explained. Bit long but makes the concept clear as possible. A big THANK YOU Josh.

  • @ramprakash7872
    @ramprakash7872 3 роки тому

    Conditional probability : Decoded. BAM !!! Tbh Some of your videos ( Very few actually. For example p-value 😁) were not very clear to me ( Well that's just me ! ) in the first instance but I digested through them somehow. But with little study & focus or just give a break for a while, the 2nd or 3rd look at your video makes the concept super clear to me and I don't need to look elsewhere. Thanks for making such videos and making statistics/probability easier.

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому

      I'm glad you are able to understand the concepts.

  • @CW-vl9zd
    @CW-vl9zd 9 місяців тому +1

    Good video that cleared up a lot of my questions. Only thing I'm confused now tho is 9:20 let's say we are given all the probabilities. How do I know if a probability is p(not love c and loves s | loves s) or p(loves s | not love c and loves s)? Confused because we know both the numerator and denominator. Thanks

    • @statquest
      @statquest  9 місяців тому +1

      Well, the second one, p(loves s | not love c and loves s), really doesn't make sense to calculate at all. This is because the conditional part, "not love c and loves s" is only a subset of "loves s", and thus, the conditional part does not give us any useful information about the larger "loves s" population.

    • @CW-vl9zd
      @CW-vl9zd 9 місяців тому +1

      @@statquest Thank you!

  • @rishikeshpillay
    @rishikeshpillay 3 роки тому +1

    Thanks for this explanation.....It really help me to grasp this topic....

  • @helgemeyer6511
    @helgemeyer6511 3 місяці тому +1

    What is the probability of a video being great GIVEN that we know it is made by Josh? Pretty close to 100%, I'd say!

  • @pratyushkashyap849
    @pratyushkashyap849 2 роки тому +1

    Incredible lecture!! Bamm😀

  • @SarahFeng92
    @SarahFeng92 Рік тому +1

    Your channel is amazing, I wish I had discovered it earlier! Would you ever consider making the slides available for sale? I would absolutely buy them.

    • @statquest
      @statquest  Рік тому

      I have some of them for sale here: statquest.org/statquest-store/

  • @BrittanyFunke
    @BrittanyFunke Рік тому +1

    This was amazing and fun. Thank you!

  • @kayhankashi9970
    @kayhankashi9970 Рік тому +1

    SUPERB explanation... BAAAM !!!!!

  • @zaf3153
    @zaf3153 2 роки тому +1

    Super easy ti understand! Thanks alot

  • @anashaat95
    @anashaat95 2 роки тому +1

    Thanks a lot. Clearly explained as you stated.

  • @MuspiMeroll
    @MuspiMeroll 6 місяців тому +1

    i love you this actually helped so much

  • @EngRiadAlmadani
    @EngRiadAlmadani 3 роки тому +2

    BAMMM!!!!
    Great work
    Can you make video about bayesian classifier because it's depending on conditional probability

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому +2

      I've already done that. Here's the link: ua-cam.com/video/O2L2Uv9pdDA/v-deo.html

  • @durgeshkshirsagar116
    @durgeshkshirsagar116 3 роки тому +2

    Wow. Great explanation with nice song ❤️❤️

  • @janiceoou
    @janiceoou 3 роки тому +2

    I was looking for sth like this recently, thanks for somehow read my mind XD (I guess some kinda probability?? BAM!

  • @kensarmoreto1863
    @kensarmoreto1863 2 роки тому +1

    although that i calculate conditional probability during college, i cannot get the concept of it leaving a gap in my stat knowledge...
    i stumbled in your video and i have a basic understanding about it. im just need a more examples regarding conditional probability to fully master this concept...
    Thanks Josh for your videos and hoping for more topics about stats and data analysis.

    • @statquest
      @statquest  2 роки тому

      I'm glad my video was helpful! :)

  • @vinodliyanage4128
    @vinodliyanage4128 3 роки тому +1

    Best explanation ever. Thank you! ❤️

  • @Darkev77
    @Darkev77 3 роки тому +2

    This might sound like a silly question but, shouldn’t one expect that P(A | ~A) = 0, and vice-versa? However this conditional notation doesn’t encompass that

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому +2

      Actually, it does. What you are asking is "The probability that someone loves candy AND does not love candy given that we know that they love candy". This results in the equation p(loves candy & does not love candy) / p(loves candy) = 0 / (6/14) = 0.

    • @Darkev77
      @Darkev77 3 роки тому +1

      @@statquest thanks a lot prof for your clarifications!

  • @animelife9351
    @animelife9351 3 роки тому +1

    Because of you, I knew this Concept "BAM" 😹😸

  • @qwerty11111122
    @qwerty11111122 3 роки тому +1

    Hi Josh! I've been working with DEseq2 a lot. Is dispersion shrinkage on your TODO list for statquest? I realize it's a little more of a niche topic for bioinformatics than broadly applicable tho

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому +2

      I'll keep it in mind.

  • @ceseb23
    @ceseb23 3 роки тому +1

    Great video, perfect explanation, marvelous song, as always :D
    I would love to see a video about Generalized Linear Models( other than logistic).

  • @piruthuviraj
    @piruthuviraj 3 роки тому +1

    Thank you so much...Now I cleared. 😁🥰🥰

  • @sigmakings7285
    @sigmakings7285 Рік тому +1

    That's a great one.thank you😊

  • @sudhamjayanthi
    @sudhamjayanthi Рік тому +1

    thank you, uncle bam!

  • @markobe08
    @markobe08 3 роки тому +2

    Josh is the best

  • @shangauri
    @shangauri 3 роки тому +1

    Good one Josh. Any plans of making videos on "Time series Models" ?

  • @easytutorial1869
    @easytutorial1869 3 роки тому +1

    What should I choose between B.tech Cse with specialization in ai/ml engineering and B.tech Cse with specialization in data science?

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому

      The answer to that question really depends on your interests.

    • @easytutorial1869
      @easytutorial1869 3 роки тому

      @@statquest But what has more scope or the scope is not going to end soon

    • @tomr03status99
      @tomr03status99 3 роки тому

      It totally depend on your interest man

  • @graningfire1776
    @graningfire1776 7 місяців тому

    Quadra BAMMMM ! ITS now clearly cleared in my mind

    • @statquest
      @statquest  7 місяців тому

      It's not clear? What time point, minutes and seconds, was confusing?

    • @graningfire1776
      @graningfire1776 7 місяців тому +1

      @@statquest sorry sir , I wish to write now but due to my mistake it become not .

  • @sumonmiah8957
    @sumonmiah8957 Рік тому

    Great!
    Which software have you used to make this video(especially animation)?

    • @statquest
      @statquest  Рік тому

      I give away all of my secrets in this video: ua-cam.com/video/crLXJG-EAhk/v-deo.html

  • @lakshman587
    @lakshman587 3 роки тому +2

    If we take
    Event A:Not loves candy
    Event B:Loves soda
    Then general formula is
    P(A∩B|B)=P(A∩B)/P(B)
    Is the above formula same as
    P(A|B)=P(A∩B)/P(B)
    (This is the formula I was taught)

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому +2

      Yes, they are the same. The formula that you were taught is harder to read than the one I use, so I don't use it.

    • @lakshman587
      @lakshman587 3 роки тому +1

      @@statquest Ok thanks a lot :)

    • @justinwhite2725
      @justinwhite2725 3 роки тому +1

      Yeah. What does upside-down-U mean?

    • @justinwhite2725
      @justinwhite2725 3 роки тому

      I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that 8:14, the formula on the bottom is the long form of the notation you used. And he's showing in this frame how the results are the same.

    • @tomr03status99
      @tomr03status99 3 роки тому

      Yes

  • @catherinele8417
    @catherinele8417 3 роки тому

    Hi ! I really like yours graphics and pictures ! What tool do you use ?

  • @sampathkumar3405
    @sampathkumar3405 3 роки тому

    Josh , Please start a series for mathematics concepts for machine learning. Such as probability, linear algebra, statistics, calculus etc.. It'll great help for us.

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому

      I have a bunch of statistics videos here: statquest.org/video-index/

  • @RaceyBeats
    @RaceyBeats 2 роки тому +1

    So bloody good!

  • @sleepydev4700
    @sleepydev4700 3 роки тому

    Hundred Bam!! Great explanation as always
    Could you put the playlist link in the description, it will help us a lot, thanks.

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому

      Which playlist are you asking about?

  • @shahf13
    @shahf13 3 роки тому

    Great job josh you are my favorite teacher !! , can you think about making a video about Multicollinearity? bam

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому

      I'll keep that in mind.

  • @levine1886
    @levine1886 3 роки тому

    Any chance you could post a video on when to run regular linear regression vs. time series ARIMA?

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому

      I'll keep that in mind.

  • @fabriciomagalhaessena2289
    @fabriciomagalhaessena2289 Рік тому +1

    Thank you so much for this video! It saves my life hahaha

  • @Darkev77
    @Darkev77 3 роки тому

    At 5:08, is it legitimate to ask "What is the probability that someone loves candy given that we know they love soda"? Without having the "and soda" condition. Or is the fact that it's "given/knowing they love soda" implies that it has to be "loves candy and soda"?

    • @statquest
      @statquest  3 роки тому +1

      Conditional probabilities can be written two ways: a "long" version and a "short" version. In this video I use the long version (because it's easier for me to read)...
      P(A and B | B) = P(A and B)/P(B)
      ...however, the short version is commonly used...
      P(A | B) = P(A and B)/P(B)
      Both mean the same thing, in other words: P(A and B | B) = P(A | B). The short version implies the "and B" part.

  • @micahdesign6657
    @micahdesign6657 3 роки тому +1

    best video ever !

  • @portiseremacunix
    @portiseremacunix 2 роки тому

    hmmm, if I have x to predict y, how can I separate the internal y variations and randomness and how the x predict the y?

    • @statquest
      @statquest  2 роки тому

      It really depends on what type of thing "y" is. Is "y" continuous? Consider linear regression: ua-cam.com/play/PLblh5JKOoLUIzaEkCLIUxQFjPIlapw8nU.html If "y" is "true/false", then consider use logistic regression: ua-cam.com/play/PLblh5JKOoLUKxzEP5HA2d-Li7IJkHfXSe.html

    • @portiseremacunix
      @portiseremacunix 2 роки тому

      @@statquest Thanks. My confusion was after the linear regression. How to do some analysis on the X -> Y, if the Y can be predicted by X or there is internal randomness in the variables?

    • @statquest
      @statquest  2 роки тому +1

      @@portiseremacunix You can calculate R^2 between the two variables. For details, see: ua-cam.com/video/2AQKmw14mHM/v-deo.html