I’m continually trying to strengthen my data science skills, in particular making heavy use of the excellent DataCamp.com. Obviously, data science is steeped in math and any discussion of a machine learning algorithm will inevitably touch on the underlying mathematical concepts.
As I progress in my learning, I’ve been taking notes in Jupyter Notebook because…why not? With its markdown and code capabilities, Jupyter Notebook is a fantastic medium for taking notes on machine learning topics, as those topics are full of both prose explaining the concepts and code executing the algorithms.
In my note taking, when my training displays a formula, I’ve been trying to re-write the formula in LaTeX in my notebook. For the most part, I’ve been successful reproducing those formulas thanks in large part to sites like Overleaf.com. However, my LaTeX still didn’t quite represent the formulas I would see in the training slides. Here’s how I represented the Ridge Regression calculation:
My LaTeX notation looked like this:
The lower and upper bounds of sigma aren’t…quite…right.
As I was looking through some of Overleaf.com’s content, though, I ran across this statement:
Note, that integral expression may seems a little different in inline and display math mode – in inline mode the integral symbol and the limits are compressed.
I also noted that some of their LaTeX expressions used double dollar signs. So, I changed my Ridge Regression expression to this:
And my expression rendered as such:
This fixed my lower and upper bounds problem, but it shifted the expression to the center of the cell. If you look at the rendered HTML, you’ll see that Jupyter Notebook adds a “text-align: center” style to the expression by default. Changing that style to “left” makes the formula a little more readable:
But not a whole lot. At any rate, it’s interesting to note these two different behaviors of LaTeX and and the pros and cons of each option. If you’re so inclined, you can find my LaTeX examples here.
Recent Comments