... To consider the effect of applying the sum rule of probability and the effect of conditioning, we explicitly write the Gaussian distribution in terms of the concatenated states $[\boldsymbol{x}^\top, \boldsymbol{y}^\top]$, ...
I believe it maintains greater consistency to employ ${[\boldsymbol{x}^\top, \boldsymbol{y}^\top]}^\top$ as the notation for the concatenated states. In this context, we concatenate two column vectors to create a new column vector. While this notation was suggested in #513, the notation $[\boldsymbol{x}^\top, \boldsymbol{y}^\top]$ (without the transpose of the row vector) was ultimately adopted. Any clarification on this matter is appreciated.
Location
Draft (2023-12-19)
Chapter 6
Page 199
Line 3
Proposed solution
Change $[\boldsymbol{x}^\top, \boldsymbol{y}^\top]$ to ${[\boldsymbol{x}^\top, \boldsymbol{y}^\top]}^\top$ in the above text.
Describe the mistake In the provided text:
I believe it maintains greater consistency to employ ${[\boldsymbol{x}^\top, \boldsymbol{y}^\top]}^\top$ as the notation for the concatenated states. In this context, we concatenate two column vectors to create a new column vector. While this notation was suggested in #513, the notation $[\boldsymbol{x}^\top, \boldsymbol{y}^\top]$ (without the transpose of the row vector) was ultimately adopted. Any clarification on this matter is appreciated.
Location
Proposed solution Change $[\boldsymbol{x}^\top, \boldsymbol{y}^\top]$ to ${[\boldsymbol{x}^\top, \boldsymbol{y}^\top]}^\top$ in the above text.