C4 progess

[Course 5 Zoombie]

hows everybody who take C4 this time?
how is your progess?

[Retired Bookworm]

Sick of it. :smile: Can't look at the stuff any more.

[Caramel]

Just received Mahler and Phai's notes.

I am freaking out.

[Trout]

Hi, Caramel:

How long did it take you to receive the notes?
They charged me two weeks ago, but my notes still not coming in.

[M.]

I'm on Lesson 19 of ASM.

If I hadn't studied the Mahler notes last sitting, I'd be totally lost right now.

[the ladies man]

I have only went throught3-4 packets on Mahlers Notes. I haven't even got the ASM Material yet...

I feel I'm screwed already.

[Cynic]

Still working on Mahler's notes. Haven't started on ASM yet. Feel sick of it all.

[Course 5 Zoombie]

i din have ASM. just have Mahler, Actex, Pai, and HTP.

[Caramel]

On 2002-02-07 15:15, M wrote:
I'm on Lesson 19 of ASM.

If I hadn't studied the Mahler notes last sitting, I'd be totally lost right now.


Hello, M

I did not purchase new study manuals of Mahler. I purchased second hand materials through someone. It took about 8 business days to deliver from MA. US to Toronto Canada through UPS standard.

It took longer than I thought. You may wish to call New England Seminar and asking for tracking number on the item and call up to check the delivery status.

[Caramel]

On 2002-02-08 06:08, david wrote:
i din have ASM. just have Mahler, Actex, Pai, and HTP.


Does anyone using Actex for course 4 at all? It seems to be people are only focused on Mahler's notes...

I am on Loss Model of the Actex, my intention is to go through Actex once, then Mahler's + ASM for second reading and problems practices.

Am I being too naive about my timing?

[Bullseye]

I passed Exam 4 on my first try ( got a 6 ). I did not look at Actex. I used ASM and Mahler. I thought they were GREAT !!

[minnie SNOW dah]

My recollection from back when I was on C4 is that Mahler is a good starting point. He explains the concepts thoroughly enough for someone who's new to the subject matter. Don't do all of his exercises, though, unless you need to in order to get the concept. It will take too long. The Actex version from when I took C4 (May 2001) was rife with errors, but it was a good source of problems from all parts of the syllabus. The solutions in Actex are more terse, though, so they're less helpful if you don't really understand how to do it.
Good luck!

[New at pd]

I think that Actex, then ASM is a good idea, <u> except </u> when it comes to credibility theory. ASM is much, MUCH better. It has better explanations, and the problems are very well picked to reinforce the equations and techniques. Actex just didn't do anything for me.

Also, as a little forewarning, there are some equations that Actex has that ASM doesn't. For example, ASM doesn't contain the equation for creating log-transformed confidence intervals for kernel-smoothed estimates (section 50 maybe) while Actex has this equation, which came up on a previous exam (November 2000 I believe.)

I've preached this before, but I'd devote a bulk of my time to ASM, then let Actex fill in the holes with some additional formulas and problems.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: New at c6 on 2002-02-08 10:06 ]</font>

[Course 5 Zoombie]

now i am preparing for the Mahler's part of notes--credibility.

[Gordo]

Lesson 15 ASM.