An Ostrowski Type Inequality for a Random Variable Whose Probability Density Fuction Belongs To Lp [A,B], P > 1
Full text
(2) .
(3) .
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9) . .
(10) .
(11)
(12) .
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16) .
(17)
(18)
(19)
(20)
(21) . Æ. .
(22) ! " ! " # !" Æ. . . . . !". Æ. . . . . ! " ! " !" $ ! " . . . . .
(23) . % & '' (
(24)
(25) ) ' * )
(26) +
(27) , - .
(28)
(29)
(30) - )
(31) )
(32)
(33)
(34) .
(35) /
(36) ,
(37)
(38) )
(39)
(40)
(41) . 0 % 1 +' 2
(42) ) '' (
(43)
(44) -) 0
(45)
(46)
(47) 0 )
(48) -
(49)
(50)
(51) ! " # 3
(52) !
(53) " # !" . . . . !&". . 3
(54) !
(55) " !
(56) " $ ! " . . . . . ! " . . !&" .
(57) 0
(58)
(59)
(60) ) 0
(61) -
(62) -- )
(63) ! " ,
(64) 2 . ) 4
(65) - . 0 ! "#$ %%%
(66)
(67)
(68) & '( ) *+ , (* - . / $ & ) 0 $ 1 ) 2 0 $ 3 $ 4 5. .
(69) . !.
(70) .
(71) ).
(72)
(73)
(74) ! " # 3
(75) !
(76) " 3
(77) !
(78) " !
(79) ". !&" . $ ! " . ½ . . . . ½· . $. . . . ½· . $ ! " ½. $ # 2 56)
(80)
(81) 0 . . ! " !" #. !&&". !" . ½ . . . . ½ . !". . ½ . .
(82)
(83) $ # ) . .
(84) ½ . . # !". . .
(85) !&&" ! " 56)
(86) !&1" ! " !" ! " 7 # ) # !7 " %
(87) !&&" 0
(88) 0 . ! " . !&". ! " . . . ! " !" . # . . #. . ! ". . ½ . ! " $. ½ . . $. . . . ½ . . ! ". ½ . . ½ . $ ! " $. ½ ½ # $ ! " $ ! " . . #. . $. ! ". ½ .
(89) . . . ½ $ ½ . . .
(90) " #$ %&
(91) '(& ) *. +.
(92) % !
(93) " # . . . !" . . - !&" /
(94) !&" 8
(95) ) -
(96) 0 . . ½ $ ½ . . ! " . )
(97)
(98) 0)
(99) !&" . 3
(100) !
(101)
(102) " !
(103) " . !&9" . $ ! ". !&". ½ . . . . ½· . $ ! " ½ . $. . . . ½· . ! " . !
(104) . $ ! ". ½ . * !
(105) " . !
(106) " $ $ ! " ½. + !&" # . . !
(107) " ! " ½ $. !
(108) " $ ! ". ½ . 0 /
(109) !&" , # !&" !
(110) " . !
(111) ". . $. ! " ½. $ ! " ½. 0 ) !&" .
(112) " # $% & #. . !" ! " ½. . .
(113).
(114) . . ! " . ½. . . .
(115) ,. !. '
(116) . $ . !&:". . ! " . ½. $. . ½ ! " $ . . $ ! ". ½ .
(117) . !&" !
(118) " !&:" . ,
(119) 0 !&" -
(120)
(121) . . "
(122) . $. . !
(123) " !&;" & ! " $ ! " & 8
(124) !&" 0 $ $ ½ & $ ! " !
(125) " & . ½ . $& $ $ ! ". ½ . . &. $. ! ". ½ . !
(126) " $& . & $ $ ! ". ½ . 0 !
(127) ". $& . $. ! ". # ! ". ½ . . & . ! " ½ & $ . . ) !&;"
(128) 0) <
(129)
(130)
(131) 0) - / ) Æ )
(132) ! "
(133) = !
(134) " - 0
(135) 7 &$ ½ $ ! $ " ½ ! " ! " . !
(136) ". $& .
(137)
(138) ) )
(139)
(140)
(141) & ).
(142) .
(143) " #$ %&
(144) '(& ) *. .
(145) . . 3
(146). . . ½ . & ! $ ". % !&" #. 3
(147). . . . $& &.
(148). ! " ½ $ . !
(149) ".
(150). . . $& !
(151) " . . $& . . ½ . & ! $ ". ! " ½.
(152) 0 . . ! " ½ 3
(153)
(154) $& & $ !
(155) " $& ½ & ! $ " +
(156) . 3
(157)
(158) $& & # 3
(159). . 3
(160).
(161). . $& & $ . .
(162). !
(163) ". $& & $ . ½ . . & ! $ " )
(164)
(165)
(166) 0). . $& . !
(167) ". . $& $ . ! " ½ $ $ . !
(168) ". !
(169) ". $& . !
(170) ". $& . $& . 8
(171) ). . "
(172) !
(173) ". . . ½ . ! ". ½ . & ! $ "
(174)
(175) ) ) . $& . $ ! " 3
(176). .
(177). $. &. &. .
(178)
(179) . , 2 . ) 4
(180) -
(181)
(182)
(183) ! " >
(184) -- ) ! " ? 7 ! ". . . > # ! ". 7. ! ? " #
(185) .
(186) . .
(187) -. !. ) ! ". . #. !. ". . . . * -
(188) 0
(189) . . ! ? " # ! " . . . ! ". .
(190) ½ . . . . # ! " . !. ". .
(191) ½ . . . ½ # ! " ! ! " $ ! " $ " .
(192) 0)) !. " $ . !. " $ 7. . ). . . +
(193) &
(194)
(195) (
(196)
(197) ! " 3
(198) !
(199) " $ . !1" . . $. ½· . $ ! ". ½· . ! ! " $ ! " $ " ! " ½. 7 . & $ ½ ! ! " $ ! !" " $ " & ! $ "
(200) -
(201) & ! " # ! ? " 7 ) 3
(202). . ½ .
(203). !
(204) " # . . (' @% .%+4%<A BC 3C<D ,.%<A ) ,@ 8%+E ) * E
(205) ,) 3-
(206) (
(207) )
(208) & '' (.,F@%. ) ' *,+F ,
(209) % C C
(210) G
(211)
(212) 2 )
(213) ' ' @ ) ' +
(214) H)
(215)
(216) . + , !;" 79G7 1 +' 2,.+C ) '' (.,F@%. ,
(217) %
(218) . ) 4
(219) - * 3
(220) -- ( 8 2
(221) .
(222) .
(223) " #$ %&
(224) '(& ) *. .
(225) !
(226) "# $ %&&'( ) ) (**% . +
(227) ) !
(228) ,"# $ %-(. " + /**% ,, )
(229)
(230)
(231) 6,
(232)
(233)
(234) , 7
(235)
(236)
(237) .
(238) .
(239)
(240)
Related documents
In a study to assess ancillary service costs at 12 US electric utilities, researchers found the average total cost to be about O,4¢/kWh, of which about 0,3¢/kWh are fixed costs
- Developed in response to market pull or technology push -A platform product that fits into an existing product line. - A process-intensive product whose chief attributes are due
of alleles in a population using a sample coverage method and then models ranked.. frequencies for these alleles using the stretched
The soil water results do not help explain the greater Cochise lovegrass seedling emergence from gravel, since soil water content under litter was similar to
Parameter space. The choices 160 and 256 are common in cryptographic applications... Our experiments included the eight curve shapes described in Section 3: 3DIK, Edwards,
The upper bound generalises and unifies several previously known bounds which apply in special cases, namely bounds on perfect hash families, frameproof codes, secure frameproof
Auf der anderen Seite konnten nach Transplantation weiblicher Spenderherzen in männliche Empfänger zwischen 0,02 und 2% Y- Chromosom-positive Kardiomyozyten
The secondary (denotational or connotational) meanings submit to the basic one; b) the semantic shades of the polysemantic word do not form a hierarchy because they are