paid vs. direct traffic analysis

Hi,

I am running Google Ads for my website and sometime I get transaction conversion (read Goals) analysis through GA.

At the same time I get DIRECT conversion in GA.

My question is, how can I get analytics of this paid traffic making transaction in their next visit to my website (either by DIRECT or ORGANIC visit)

Thanks.

how you would move forward from completing the Planning, requirements modelling and analysis part of the development process?

I am following RUP/USDP practice. I have made Use case model, High level, Use case, Expanded, Interactions Diagrams, and Class Diagram.

Question: Explain how you would move forward from this part of the development process.

Rudin Principles of Mathematical Analysis Chapter 10, Exercise 8

I’m working on exercises of chapter 10 in Baby Rudin.

I refer to R. Cooke’s solutions manual to Baby Rudin while I’m solving those exercises.(https://minds.wisconsin.edu/handle/1793/67009)

But I think there is a wrong solution for Chap 10, exercise 8.

Baby Rudin, chap 10, ex 8

the wrong part of a solution for chap 10, ex 8

Using Theorem 10.9 in Baby Rudin, which is about change of variables on a multiple integral, I think we should represent a integrand on the right side with a mapping T, not an inverse of T.

Could you guys check if I’m right or that solution is right?

Vanishing sequences and $p$-adic analysis

Suppose we are given a convergent series (for all $ x\in\mathbb{R}$ ) with rational coefficients, say $ $ F(x)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}a_n\,x^n.$ $ Further, assume that there exist infinitely many primes $ q_1,q_2,\dots$ such the partial sum satisfy $ $ \sum_{n=0}^{q_j-1}a_n\,u^n\equiv0\mod q_j, \qquad j=1,2,\dots$ $ for some fixed $ u\in\mathbb{Z}$ .

QUESTION. What can be said about the arithmetic property (such as, $ p$ -adic) of $ F(u)$ ?

How can i customize columns for time format only as [h]:mm:ss for analysis purposes?

I need three columns in a custom list that shows time only – such as check-in time; 06:00:00 and checkout time; 06:45:24, I need to calculate the time differences in the third columns such as 00:45:24 – I need the third columns formate time as [hh]:mm: ss for analysis purposes if I need to show overall difference time such as the total time spend in whatever a place.

What is the meaning of the “constant term of Eisenstein series” in terms of Fourier analysis

Let $ G$ be a connected, reductive group over $ \mathbb Q$ , with parabolic subgroup $ P = MN$ . Let $ \pi$ be a cuspidal automorphic representation of $ M(\mathbb A)$ . For a smooth, right $ K$ -finite function $ \phi$ in the induced space $ \operatorname{Ind}_{P(\mathbb A)}^{G(\mathbb A)} \pi$ (realized in a suitable way as a function $ \phi: G(\mathbb Q) \backslash G(\mathbb A )\rightarrow \mathbb C$ ), we can associate the Eisenstein series

$ $ E(g,\phi) = \sum\limits_{\delta \in P(\mathbb Q) \backslash G(\mathbb Q)} \phi(\delta g)$ $ Assuming $ \pi$ is chosen so that this series converges absolutely, one can define the constant term of the Eisenstein series along a parabolic subgroup $ P’$ with unipotent radical $ N’$ :

$ $ E_{P’}(g,\phi) = \int\limits_{N'(\mathbb Q) \backslash N'(\mathbb A)}E(n’g,\phi)dn’ \tag{0}$ $

I see the constant term defined in this way without reference to Fourier analysis. Is it possible to always realize this object as the constant term of an honest Fourier expansion on some product of copies of $ \mathbb A/\mathbb Q$ ?

This can be done when $ G = \operatorname{GL}_2$ and $ P = P’$ the usual Borel. The unipotent radical identifies with the additive group $ \mathbb G_a$ , and for fixed $ g \in G(\mathbb A)$ the function $ \mathbb A/\mathbb Q \rightarrow \mathbb C, n \mapsto \phi(ng)$ has an absolutely convergent Fourier expansion

$ $ E(ng,\phi) = \sum\limits_{\alpha \in \mathbb Q} \int\limits_{\mathbb A/\mathbb Q} E(n’ng,\phi) \psi(-\alpha n’)dn’ \tag{1}$ $ where $ \psi$ is a fixed nontrivial additive character of $ \mathbb A/\mathbb Q$ . The constant term is

$ $ \int\limits_{\mathbb A/\mathbb Q} E(n’ng,\phi) dn’$ $ Setting $ n = 1$ in (1) gives us a series expansion for $ E(g,\phi)$ and (0) is the constant term of this series.

Web Application Firewall using web app source code analysis

I read this page: Category:OWASP Best Practices: Use of Web Application Firewalls, and I found that WAF cannot generally detect logical attacks.

We know each web application has a number of input parameters. I think these input parameters and their associated valid values can be possibly extracted by code analysis tool.

Now, my question is that can we use code analysis tools and pass their results to the WAF to detect some logical attacks such as an example which has been described in this page: Logical and Technical Vulnerabilities?

Besides, I would like to know what are the advantages of using code analysis with WAF?

I googled and I couldn’t find any WAF which uses code analysis for generating its rules or increasing its performance and decreasing false positives.

Small step vs big step semantics for static analysis?

To be an honest question poster I do not yet fully grasp the difference between small step and big step semantics. There was a good discussion here

My question is if I were to do static analysis on a file to determine if it is malware, what would be better to use: small step or big step semantics?

To take this a step further if I am doing dynamic analysis which would be best: small step or big step semantics?

Preferably a simple example as to why would be much appreciated.

rudin math analysis – fourier seris, why fourier series is real if and only $c_{-n}=\overline{c_{n}}$

In the principles of Mathematical Analysis, here is the formula (60)

$ f(x)=\sum_{-N}^{N} c_{n}e^{inx}$ ($ x$ is real).

Let us multiply (60) by $ e^{-imx}$ , where $ m$ is an integer; if we integrate the product, (61) shows that

$ c_m = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} f(x)e^{-imx} dx$ (62)

for $ |m| \leq N$ . If $ |m| > N$ , the integral in (62) is 0.

The following observation can be read off from (60) and (62): The trigonometric polynomial $ f$ , given by (60), is real if and only if $ c_{-n}=\overline{c_n}$ for $ n=0,\cdots, N$ .

How can we easily read off?