Talk:Hat notation

Comments

There isn't a 'hat operator' - it is just an available notation. Charles Matthews 22:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

So do you think this article should be deleted? I don't know enough but the term 'hat operator' doesn't seem to be widely used. –Pomte 03:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

There is a 'top-hat operator' in imaging theory: see top-hat filter. But 'hat' is so widely used as a notation that it seems odd to give just one example. Richard Pinch (talk) 06:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't thin it should be deleted! It's useful so people (like me) who come across the notation can quicly look up a list of possible meanings. I had forgotten whether, in statistics, the hat notation represented the estimate or the population value. I come to this page and the question feels silly 2 minutes later. It saved me time, it will save others time too. Also, I know it has very few sources, but it's acting as a redirect page to Wikipedia pages with plenty of sources. Science-is-real (talk) 01:22, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Rename article to "Hat notation"

The article seems to be about use of the 'hat' in notation, not about any operator. Perhaps the article should be renamed?

Also I came across the use of the hat notation in my control theory course, where it was used in the context of the Kalman filter to indicate the estimated state variable x, which seems to agree in principle with its use in statistics, perhaps worthy of mention? (if such use is commonplace) Erik.Bjareholt (talk) 12:52, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Renaming done.-St.nerol (talk) 11:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Logic

Something should be said about the symbol in symbolic logic. 2600:1008:B162:400A:6C37:4974:59C8:F16E (talk) 18:28, 5 March 2023 (UTC)