lecture-python-intro
                                
                                 lecture-python-intro copied to clipboard
                                
                                    lecture-python-intro copied to clipboard
                            
                            
                            
                        [commod_price] Editorial Suggestions
Comments by @SylviaZhaooo.
Content
- [x] Missing period in "The lecture will discuss one way to solve a “functional equation” for an unknown function".
- [x] “functional equation” (the equation where the unknown object is a function).
- [x] Add an internal link to IID.
- [x] State that density function $\phi$ is defined on positive values.
- [x] "supply is the sum of carryover by speculators and the current harvest" -> "supply is the sum of carryover by speculators and the current harvest, and".
- [x] supply $=$ -> supply is given by.
- [ ] Trying to explain the differences between $X$ and $x$ and better explain (25.5).
- [ ] Explain what are $q_i$ $i \in \mathbb{N}$ under (25.8). Clarify that we wanna solve for (25.7), and we use (25.8) as an approximation (CC @jstac).
- [x] Link Monte Carlo to the asset pricing lecture.
- [x] Add a y-axis for the plot of $p^*$.
comments by @pgrosser1
Content
- [x] -Add axis label to the graph in section 25.2, e.g cotton price in USD
- [x] Might consider treating $\alpha$ as a more general factor rather than just simply the depreciation rate. Can potentially delete the phrase regarding depreciation
- [x] Explain why we are enforcing the no arbitrage condition (25.5.1)
- [x] Add a few sentence explaining the logic behind equation 25.2 (25.5.1)
- [x] Explain that market clearing happens when supply equals demand (25.5.1)
- [x] For section 25.2, introduce the idea that the method is an ansatz. Also consider adding a section explaining the what an ansatz is and why rigorous can still be achieved
- [x] Toward the end of section 25.5.2 mention the last part of the section is verifying the ansatz
partially resolved by #443
@SylviaZhaooo I see that all checkboxes appear to be ticked in this issue and there were commits in #443 within the last two weeks (after @jstac comment above). Does that mean this issue can now be closed?
Thanks for your comments @pgrosser1, @SylviaZhaooo, @Jiarui-ZH, @mbek0605, and @HumphreyYang
Thanks @SylviaZhaooo for working on the associated PRs.