News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:How to Think about Correlation? by adamnemecek on Wednesday December 09, 2020 @12:16AM (#25355605)
Correlation and convolution are adjoints.
Re:How to Think about Correlation? by bollu on Wednesday December 09, 2020 @01:43AM (#25355987)
Can you expand a little further? I don't see the adjunction (between what categories?)
Re:How to Think about Correlation? by contravariant on Wednesday December 09, 2020 @06:16AM (#25357460)
It's somewhat weird to see someone immediately jump to category theory when it's more likely to be about basic linear algebra.

That said convolution and correlation are not linear operators but bilinear operators, so I'm struggling a bit to see in what sense they're adjoint.

Maybe something like:

<Conv(x,y), z> = <y, Corr(x, z)>

which does actually work if you let the inner product be the integral of the product and the correlation the time-correlation (so the inner product is the correlation at time 0).

Re:How to Think about Correlation? by adamnemecek on Wednesday December 09, 2020 @01:19PM (#25361774)
That is what I was referring to yes, however it is also adjoints in the category theory sense.

http://www.reproducibility.org/RSF/book/bei/conj/paper_html/...

Re:How to Think about Correlation? by bollu on Friday December 11, 2020 @08:52AM (#25385684)
Ah I see; The word "adjoint" tripped me up, I presumed they meant "adjunction", and not the matrix-transpose-adjoint :)
Re:How to Think about Correlation? by codeplay on Wednesday December 09, 2020 @03:52AM (#25356650)
i GUESS what he means is something like inverse of covariance matrix gives correlation matrix, something like this question: https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/140080