Let's test this assumption by heading over to Eastern Europe.

An assumption and only an assumption.

And this is a huge assumption.

That's why this assumption is important.

The assumption is something like this.

So we just took your assumption, divided by 12.

And finally there's this assumption of homoskedasticity.

And this risk free is the big assumption.

More data? Making the Markov assumption rather than naive Bayes assumption?

That's just an assumption.

It's all assumption driven.

Seems the logical assumption.

So, by questioning this assumption that all the needles have to be parallel, this project also taught me an important lesson

This is under the assumption that there's no parallel arcs.

What about the second assumption?

Because we'll see later in this video that to some degree, that assumption is one of the biggest drivers of assumption.

So this is the assumption that you get in on that.

This is a feasible goal, basically because, contrary to widespread assumption,

This brings me to the third, and perhaps most problematic, assumption

That's a big assumption, and we could test whether or not that assumption is valid.

Would it be helpful to make a Markov assumption rather than the naive Bayes assumption?

It's a reasonable assumption I think.

That's one hell of an assumption.

But that assumption was a problem.

Perhaps it was just an assumption.

Using this assumption, he was able to explain some properties of light.

In this case, the problem really comes down to the naive Bayes assumption is a weak one, and the Markov assumption would do much better.

She put on an assumption of ignorance.

What he said bears out my assumption.

That assumption is further substantiated by the presence of a dog at the scene of the crime.

That's one of the reasons why making this naive Bayes assumption is so helpful.

There's another tradition that thinks it's opposed to this but accepts the worst assumption.

The second assumption which informs the American view of choice goes something like this.

The basic law, let's say here's an assumption.

I'm not at all comfortable with that assumption.

They're making some assumption about the discount rates.

The discount rate assumption is everything in finance.

I think six martinis is a reasonable assumption.

That's a hell of an assumption to make...

We'll do other videos where we talk about when it is a good assumption, when it isn't a good assumption.

That although it looks really reasonable, let's say I make this 3 annual appreciation assumption.

And they have thereof no knowledge. They follow not except assumption, and indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all.

We can make the Markov assumption and that's the assumption that the effect of one variable on another will be local.

It's extremely unlikely given the assumption that everybody's healthy.

How would we detect a violation of that assumption?