“If you observed the square-free sequence so far, then guess on square-free indices and otherwise”. It’s the exact opposite of what it should be doing.
How could that behaviour emerge if it’s not in the hypothesis class?
The hypothesis you describe wouldn’t result the behaviour I quoted. If the hypothesis “put 1 on square-free and 0 otherwise” is not in the hypothesis class, then “If you observed the square-free sequence so far, then guess 0 on square-free indices and 1 otherwise” is not in the hypothesis class either. Or are you claiming that the behaviour emerges from constantly changing “leading hypothesis”?
How could that behaviour emerge if it’s not in the hypothesis class?
I think the hypothesis class contains “square-free sequence until n”, for any finite n.
Set n = current index + 2.
It’s very poorly worded, I might be misunderstanding too.
The hypothesis you describe wouldn’t result the behaviour I quoted. If the hypothesis “put 1 on square-free and 0 otherwise” is not in the hypothesis class, then “If you observed the square-free sequence so far, then guess 0 on square-free indices and 1 otherwise” is not in the hypothesis class either. Or are you claiming that the behaviour emerges from constantly changing “leading hypothesis”?
Yeah, leading hypothesis changes.