Load the lars package and the New York Housing dataset (as in the attached file for download). Next, load the glmnet package that will be used to implement LASSO.
Save the MEDV as y and only use the first 12 variables (i. e., columns in New York Housing dataset) as x. While x is a set of independent variables, y is the dependent variable which is a quantitative measure of the median housing values. (Hints: can assign matrix format to the variable x).
Generate separate scatterplots with the line of best fit for all the predictors in x with y on the vertical axis.
Regress y on the predictors in x using OLS (Ordinary Least Square Regression). We will use this result as benchmark for comparison.
Use the glmnet function to plot the path of each of x's variable coefficients against the L1 norm of the beta vector. This graph indicates at which stage each coefficient shrinks to zero.
Use the cv. glmnet function to get the cross validation curve and the value of lambda that minimizes the mean cross validation error.
Using the minimum value of lambda from the previous exercise, get the estimated beta matrix.
To get a more parsimonious model we can use a higher value of lambda that is within one standard error of the minimum.
Use this value of lambda to get the beta coefficients. Note that more coefficients are now shrunk to zero.
Please refer to Example 6.1 and 6.2 of Chapter 6 in our textbook for details regarding how LASSO works so you know how to explain your results in this assignment.

relativism, roughly put, is the view that truth and falsity, right and wrong, standards of reasoning, and procedures of justification are products of differing conventions and frameworks of assessment and that their authority is confined to the context giving rise to them. more precisely, “relativism” covers views which maintain that—at a high level of abstraction—at least some class of things have the properties they have (e.g., beautiful, morally good, epistemically justified) not simpliciter, but only relative to a given framework of assessment (e.g., local cultural norms, individual standards), and correspondingly, that the truth of claims attributing these properties holds only once the relevant framework of assessment is specified or supplied. relativists characteristically insist, furthermore, that if something is only relatively so, then there can be no framework-independent vantage point from which the matter of whether the thing in question is so can be established.

relativism has been, in its various guises, both one of the most popular and most reviled philosophical doctrines of our time. defenders see it as a harbinger of tolerance and the only ethical and epistemic stance worthy of the open-minded and tolerant. detractors dismiss it for its alleged incoherence and uncritical intellectual permissiveness. debates about relativism permeate the whole spectrum of philosophical sub-disciplines. from ethics to epistemology, science to religion, political theory to ontology, theories of meaning and even logic, philosophy has felt the need to respond to this heady and seemingly subversive idea. discussions of relativism often also invoke considerations relevant to the very nature and methodology of philosophy and to the division between the so-called “analytic and continental” camps in philosophy. and yet, despite a long history of debate going back to plato and an increasingly large body of writing, it is still difficult to come to an agreed definition of what, at its core, relativism is, and what philosophical import it has. this entry attempts to provide a broad account of the many ways in which “relativism” has been defined, explained, defended and criticized.

explanation:

ill do it for 100, also this isnt 80 its 40

a=d/t

a="triangle"v/t

explanation:

a = acceleration