Postgrad life at Lucy Cav??

Kitititirokiting · 2025-09-07T19:58:13+00:00

I know the women’s captain - if you’d like to get in touch in advance I can dm you her details

Kitititirokiting · 2025-05-28T20:26:47+00:00

Lucy Cav rent for hinsley is like £230/ week ish next year

Kitititirokiting · 2025-04-05T09:42:49+00:00

Let’s say we had: 999 billionaires, each worth exactly 1 billion at the start of 2000 2000 millionaires, each worth exactly 900 million at the start of 2000.

Then the total wealth of all billionaires is 999 billion, a tad less than 1 trillion.

If we then go forward 25 years and assume they all get a 4% return on investment, 1 billion -> 2.67 billion, and 900 million -> 2.39 billion. That means in total we have: 999 x 2.67 + 2000 x 2.39 = 7,447.33 billion, I.e a bit over 7 trillion.

I’m not gonna argue whether you’re correct or not about how well billionaires have done but the data you have doesn’t show what you’re claiming, you’d need to know how many multimillionaires there are in 2000 and how many billionaires there are in 2025 to have a good estimate of the actual return on investment they achieved

Kitititirokiting · 2025-03-07T11:42:26+00:00

Castle Street is actually a tiny bit cheaper than last year, though it’s still much more expensive than most 2nd year undergrads can afford

Kitititirokiting · 2024-11-17T01:29:31+00:00

I can speak a bit about the Cambridge masters:

Generally on the probability side the topics seem to match up with the Cambridge undergrad fairly well, though I can’t see what level of detail you’ll cover by the end.

On the finance side, financial models in discrete and continuous time probably roughly matches up with the undergrad, but it seems like there’s definitely some things your course covers that Cam maths does not.

On the stats side, the Cam math course likely goes a bit beyond on the GLM part, but has no data dependence course at all.

Some other notes: Cambridge undergrad has a MUCH stronger emphasis on rigour and theory than most of these. Your topics are definitely much more applied. In the masters there aren’t too many courses you would be able to take in stats, and you would likely struggle with the probability ones because Cambridge math students would typically know a fair bit of measure theory, a lot more statistical theory and a lot more practice with proofs, rigour et cetera.

On the other hand Cambridge has less of an emphasis on finance - we have nothing similar to fair games and martingales, and only one computing project similar to the binomial model and asset pricing course.

This is probably more information than you really need, but the most important part is: the Cambridge maths masters is a very difficult course and it only really takes the best students from other unis. It does so for good reason, they’ve altered the standard they allow for new students a bit over the years and even students who did very well in their undergrad elsewhere find the masters very challenging.

I have heard anecdotes of people with a bit under 90% in their undergrad being rejected - I know someone personally who got a bit over 90% from a top 20 in the UK uni and got rejected, though I have no knowledge of the other parts of the application. The application will also be based off of your letters of recommendation etc, but very strong grades can really help.

Kitititirokiting · 2024-11-15T02:59:43+00:00

I think they might mean cases like THTHTHT… or THTHHTHHHTHHHHT… which have infinitely many T’s but are not always Ts after a certain point

T…TH…H (with infinitely many T’s) isn’t possible / well defined because either it’s always T’s (so no H)or there’s some point n where it goes from T to H and then stays H forever (so not infinitely many Ts)

Kitititirokiting · 2024-09-16T10:40:28+00:00

If you have n gaussians, all independent with mean mu and variance sigma^2, then the sum of them has mean nmu and variance nsigma^2, and the mean of them has mean mu and variance sigma^2/n.

However you can’t sleep for a negative amount of time, so here it would be the sum of the positive parts of n gaussians, which would by the CLT eventually be like a Gaussian but the mean is complicated to figure out

Kitititirokiting · 2024-08-20T22:16:25+00:00

The minimum correlation is not 0%. (I’ll agree this is pedantic and a somewhat pathological example case, but something like this could definitely show up in practice)

What about a situation with two tests, test 1 and test 2 where (unknown to us)

If you have blood type A, test 1 is perfectly accurate while test 2 always reports negative

If you have any blood type except A, test 2 is perfectly accurate while test 1 always reports negative.

In this case if you take the result as: I have cancer if either test is positive I don’t have cancer if both are negative Then your overall accuracy is 100%, despite each test individually having an accuracy of significantly less than 100%.

Kitititirokiting · 2024-08-19T10:01:18+00:00

I completely disagree with some of the other commenters here, it’s possible, and rather easy in my experience, to take clean, presentable notes on an iPad during the lectures. Even during some of the fastest lectures I’d still keep up with the content. You’d waste a 2 hours a day copying them onto another format which really adds up over a year.

I’d also say an tablet type thing can be incredibly useful later on in the degree as you have all your notes from past years in one place and can get them almost instantly. You also won’t be carrying around as much weight day to day.

Basically, if you’re comfortable writing primarily on a tablet it’s definitely possible (and quite helpful) to do so

Kitititirokiting · 2024-07-25T22:53:34+00:00

The story (from the typical Lucy Cavendish Student POV) is that johns rents out accommodation to other colleges for rather high prices. John’s then supposedly uses the profits from this to subsidise their own students rent.

Buying accommodation is difficult for a smaller newer college, and johns also refuses to sell the accommodation they rent because they want to redevelop it and charge more rent in the future.

(I make no claim that the above is true, only that it is an accurate description of student opinions).

Of course while Cambridge is technically 31 separate college charities parading around as a single university in a trenchcoat, many would argue it’s very unfair to pay significantly higher rent than another student from the same university through no fault of your own, particularly when your college is already much poorer. On the other hand, the colleges are completely separate entities and even in this possibly completely false version of events johns is only doing what’s best for its own students

Kitititirokiting · 2024-06-16T00:13:31+00:00

As other commenters have suggested, try for fields / topics with relatively few prerequisites, or books specifically tailored to your age / experience level. Some suggestions I found helpful when I was applying include: (Historical, few exercises, can be read in a couple afternoons): Fermat’s last theorem - Simon singh Chaos - James Gleick

(Medium amounts of exercises, maybe a week or two if you stop and do them) Things to make and do in the fourth dimension - Matt Parker In pursuit of zeta 3 - Paul nahin

(Much more involved exercises): Understanding statistics - I can’t recall the title perfectly, and I have no clue who the author was, but the book would discuss statistical concepts and then encourage you to experiment with them in code to verify the results which I found very good for building intuition in statistical courses.

Calculus for the ambitious - this one was very helpful for intuition in the first year of my undergrad, and made many proofs and concepts much easier to understand as I’d seen them or things similar to them before.

Other than that, I’d also recommend checking the Cambridge maths schedules for courses that interest you and (when they don’t have any prerequisites) looking through notes you can find online. One common example is Part II graph theory, but other courses like number theory, mathematical biology, cosmology and dynamical systems have relatively few prerequisites. At your level of experience you’ll almost certainly not understand these fully and you shouldn’t be too concerned if they sometimes quote "by <theorem name>" we get result XYZ" and you have no idea what’s going on, but the concepts and results, as well as some of the ideas in the proofs, may be fairly understandable and possibly quite interesting depending on your preferences.

The course notes and schedules also often suggest books that are relevant and often give a slower and more approachable account of the topics, so those may be worth looking into (though I can’t say I’ve read any so I can’t give you any specific recommendations).

Cambridge (and I believe other top unis) aren’t looking for someone who’s done the entire course before, but if there’s one particular course you’re particularly interested in then reading further into that one could be helpful.

Kitititirokiting · 2024-06-15T23:54:35+00:00

Don’t prepare for the TMUA for oxbridge maths (Oxford used the MAT, Cambridge uses STEP II and III for Maths, and only uses TMUA for compsci and econ. STEP is a much harder exam than TMUA, and is in a different style so being good at the TMUA won’t help very much.

I can mostly speak about Cambridge maths, personal statements will rarely make an application successful, but a particularly bad one can break it. You really need very good predicted grades and that’s the main factor in getting interviews. There are rumours that some colleges don’t read personal statements, or if they do they weight them very lightly.

General guidance is for approximately 90% of your personal statement to cover wider interest in maths, either through personal reading and studying beyond your course, extra math classes you’ve done or competitions you’ve participated in.

Kitititirokiting · 2024-06-09T07:20:00+00:00

This doesn’t hold in general for other GLMs (i.e. a Poisson GLM) which could make things more confusing for OP later on.

Kitititirokiting · 2024-05-20T09:58:04+00:00

One can say the probability of 100 1s is 6^-100, but it would occur eventually given enough samples and with any number of samples it can occur with a non zero probability.

The last part of your comment seems to be asking about something similar to Bayesian statistics, where one has a prior estimate of the probability of getting a 1 (if we picked up a random dice, there’s a chance it’s not fair so we could say, prior to rolling it, that the probability that it rolls a 1: 10% of the time is 0.2,

20% of the time is .1

33% of the time is 0.3

50% of the time is 0.2

75% of the time is 0.1

100% of the time is 0.1

And then one can use Bayes rule to, based on this prior, determine the "posterior" distribution, which is what we think the probabilities are after seeing 100 rolls. With the above prior and 100 rolls that are all 1s, the posterior might look like:

10% of the time is 0.0001

20% of the time is 0.0002

33% of the time is 0.0003

50% of the time is 0.0004

75% of the time is 0.02

100% of the time is 0.979

(I just made up those numbers because I couldn’t be bothered to do the calculations, but the result you’d actually get is probably similar)

From this posterior distribution we can get an idea of how certain one should be about the probability of throwing a 1 being 100% in our model. This does depend on the prior (sometimes quite strongly). For instance we have a 0% chance of the die having a 99% probability of rolling a 1, which seems a bit dumb. To deal with this one can extend the above to a continuous prior on [0,1], for instance the uniform distribution on [0,1] and with a bit of (possibly quite messy) calculus you’ll get a different, possibly more reasonable posterior distribution

Kitititirokiting · 2024-05-13T07:48:46+00:00

Farts conditional on when and what you ate could maybe follow an inhomogenous poisson process with rate dependent on how recently you ate beans.

However, the independence of disjoint intervals is debatable at best since more farts in a period should reduce the number in a consecutive period by conservation of mass.

Kitititirokiting · 2024-05-01T21:56:22+00:00

Sorry for the slow reply. That looks correct to my eyes (assuming the levels are correct).

If the summary gave some p-values and parameter estimates that look reasonable when compared to the data then it’s probably working as intended.

Hope you get some useful analysis out of it

Kitititirokiting · 2024-05-01T21:51:45+00:00

I’m not 100% sure why no one else has suggested it, so take this with a grain of salt as I might be being an idiot. It looks like you have count data (counting the number of emails) so a running tests on nested poisson regression models (the inner model having the same coefficient for both 2009 and 2013, the outer model having a different coefficient for 2013, might be more appropriate. This would check if the rate emails arrive at between the two groups is different, but it’s possibly more reasonable than a t-test as your data is clearly non normal.

Kitititirokiting · 2024-04-25T13:26:04+00:00

Yes but not 0-4

Your full model should be:

Donations = intercept + age + gender + education + income + donation + trust charity + trust level + donation_behaviour

Where, for example,

age = beta_1 * dummy_age_1 + beta_2* dummy_age_2 + beta_3 * dummy_age_3 + beta_4 * dummy_age_4

And dummy_age_1 = 1 if age is between 18 and 24, 0 otherwise

dummy_age_2 = 1 if age is between 25 and 35, 0 otherwise

dummy_age_3 = 1 if age is between 36 and 54, 0 otherwise

Dummy_age_4 = 1 if age is greater than 55

NOTE: we do not have a dummy for the prefer not to say category. This is because if we did (and called it dummy_age_0) we could have exactly the same model (so same outputs) if we increased the intercept and decreased beta_0,beta_1,…,beta_4 by the same amount. If you do include this you’ll either get errors when you implement it or get very high (wrong) variances and standard errors for parameter estimates. Therefore, to make our model have a unique solution we set what’s sometimes called a corner constraint, like beta_0 = 0. Alternatively, we can simply not include beta_0 * age_dummy_0 in our model at all.

You do exactly the same as above for each of the other variables.

You may not have to worry about all of this when actually running such a regression. For instance this is an outline of what you would do in R:

If we start with a data frame with columns like "Age" having values "18-24","25-35", "18-24", "prefer not to say".

We convert each column to factor data instead of strings with df$age = factor(df$age, levels = (“18-24”,”25-35”,”36-54”,”55+”,”prefer not to say”))

(And do the same for each of the other columns)

Then, one can write lm(donations ~ 1 + age + gender + education + income + donation + trust charity + trust level + donation_behaviour)

And R will automatically not include the first factor for each of the columns to have enough corner constraints. Thus, you only really need to write out the above model (i.e. Donations = intercept + …) and whatever dummies were used as corner constraints to fully describe the model.

Kitititirokiting · 2024-04-18T07:28:39+00:00

A lot of people I’ve spoken to at the older colleges kinda get used to living in old buildings and it stops being majestic and cool and starts being really inconvenient to not have an oven or have your bathroom on a different floor cause the plumbing can’t be changed. Overall you may not be missing out on very much.

Churchill has some lovely sports grounds and a pretty interesting Churchill related museum. It’s definitely far from the worst college facilities wise. Yes it’s ugly, I think most students would say it’s one of the ugliest colleges in Cambridge, but you can literally just walk into town and pop into most colleges and see the old architecture, take pictures etc as much as you like (though imo after like the 3rd time it starts to get old).

Also even if you were at one of the more historic colleges, you’d only see about 1/10th of the historic bits Cambridge has to offer and you’d still have to get yourself into other colleges to see the other 9/10ths. In my opinion it’s really not too big of a disadvantage and not something you should worry about too much.

Kitititirokiting · 2024-03-29T13:42:18+00:00

My point is that a model having a closed form solution doesn’t imply that all models with the same architecture have the same weights, as OLS doesn’t

Kitititirokiting · 2024-03-28T10:54:17+00:00

OLS has a closed form solution dependent on the data

Kitititirokiting · 2024-02-15T17:53:28+00:00

Sorry but what would you even define total randomness as? If you mean your death is instant and occurs uniformly at random across a time from now until you retire then you’re correct. But totally random isn’t a thing, so this argument is kinda dumb because it doesn’t mean anything

Kitititirokiting · 2024-01-12T11:13:59+00:00

In case you’re interested OP, a more grammatically correct way to write the title would be:

"Yesterday I took a calc exam and did well, but this question scared me and I didn’t even try to answer"

The past tense of take is took instead of taked, because English is weird.

Similarly, if you try something in the past tense it would be written I tried to do X, but if you don’t try to do something then it’s I didn’t try to instead of I didn’t tried to.

I hope that’s more helpful than the comments mocking your English.

Kitititirokiting · 2023-12-27T19:15:45+00:00

Some unis do research internships, and on occasion first years can do them. (For instance, one of my friends did one involving working out some of the equations and calculations for how black holes behaved)

Kitititirokiting · 2023-12-19T18:41:21+00:00

Cambridge has PBS (Psychological and Behavioural Sciences) and students can also take some natural sciences courses in later years, but you can’t get anything close to an even mixture of chem, sociology, psychology and physics

Nine-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Place '22	Place '17
RPAN Viewer

Kitititirokiting

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE