Math Help Forum

Math Help Forum Feed Site Feed

Go Back   Math Help Forum > University Math Help > Advanced Probability and Statistics
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 25th, 2009, 04:08 PM
topsquark's Avatar
Generous Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Angelica, NY
Posts: 7,605
Country:
Thanks: 643
Thanked 2,305 Times in 2,093 Posts
topsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond repute
Default Linear Regression?

So I'm working on this Physics problem, which (alas!) turns into an unsolvable Math problem. I have the equation (as a function of t):
e^{at} = a^{\prime} t + b^{\prime};~~0 \leq t \leq T
where a is presumed known.

The question boils down to how to find reasonable values for a' and b' that best model the above equation. (I can't simply do a Taylor Expansion on the left hand side because T could be large.) Now, being the Physicist I am I would know how find an estimate if the equation were
e^{at} = b^{\prime};~~0 \leq t \leq T
The "best fit" in this case would be to find the average of the exponential function as t goes from 0 to T.

Is there a way to think of this equation as a "best fit" problem by using the exponential function as if it were "data?"

-Dan
__________________
Got a Physics question? Come on over to
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain." - The Litany Against Fear, "Dune" by Frank Herbert
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
 
  #2  
Old June 26th, 2009, 01:09 AM
CaptainBlack's Avatar
Grand Panjandrum
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: South of England
Posts: 11,265
Country:
Thanks: 656
Thanked 3,585 Times in 2,887 Posts
CaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by topsquark View Post
So I'm working on this Physics problem, which (alas!) turns into an unsolvable Math problem. I have the equation (as a function of t):
e^{at} = a^{\prime} t + b^{\prime};~~0 \leq t \leq T
where a is presumed known.

The question boils down to how to find reasonable values for a' and b' that best model the above equation. (I can't simply do a Taylor Expansion on the left hand side because T could be large.) Now, being the Physicist I am I would know how find an estimate if the equation were
e^{at} = b^{\prime};~~0 \leq t \leq T
The "best fit" in this case would be to find the average of the exponential function as t goes from 0 to T.

Is there a way to think of this equation as a "best fit" problem by using the exponential function as if it were "data?"

-Dan
There are at least two answers to this (assuming a is a known numeric value)

1. Set up a model in Excel and use the solver to minimise:

\int_{t=0}^T [e^{at}-(a't+b')]^2 dt

of course this will be discretised so you will have to find (a', b') that minimises:

\sum_{t_i} [e^{at_i}-(a't_i+b')]^2

2. Expand e^{at} in orthogonal polynomials on (0,T) stopping at the linear term.

CB
Reply With Quote
The following users thank CaptainBlack for this useful post:
Donate to MHF
  #3  
Old June 27th, 2009, 03:00 AM
CaptainBlack's Avatar
Grand Panjandrum
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: South of England
Posts: 11,265
Country:
Thanks: 656
Thanked 3,585 Times in 2,887 Posts
CaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlack View Post
There are at least two answers to this (assuming a is a known numeric value)

1. Set up a model in Excel and use the solver to minimise:

\int_{t=0}^T [e^{at}-(a't+b')]^2 dt

of course this will be discretised so you will have to find (a', b') that minimises:

\sum_{t_i} [e^{at_i}-(a't_i+b')]^2

2. Expand e^{at} in orthogonal polynomials on (0,T) stopping at the linear term.

CB
I have run method 2 through Maxima and the results are shown in the attachment (I ought to condense this down to a function definition since this is at least the second time I have done this).

(this is just using Gram-Schmidt to find the first few orthogonormal basis polynomials then using the first couple of terms of the generalised Fourier series corresponding to the orthonormal basis - note I am using the inner product of real functions not that for complex)

CB
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Printing oth1.pdf (88.9 KB, 8 views)

Last edited by CaptainBlack; June 27th, 2009 at 03:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
The following users thank CaptainBlack for this useful post:
Donate to MHF
  #4  
Old June 27th, 2009, 04:01 AM
CaptainBlack's Avatar
Grand Panjandrum
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: South of England
Posts: 11,265
Country:
Thanks: 656
Thanked 3,585 Times in 2,887 Posts
CaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlack View Post
I have run method 2 through Maxima and the results are shown in the attachment (I ought to condense this down to a function definition since this is at least the second time I have done this).

(this is just using Gram-Schmidt to find the first few orthogonormal basis polynomials then using the first couple of terms of the generalised Fourier series corresponding to the orthonormal basis - note I am using the inner product of real functions not that for complex)

CB
IIRC there is also a trick that will allow the minimisation of the square relative error by defining the weight to be one over the square of the function you are trying to fit.

CB

Last edited by CaptainBlack; June 27th, 2009 at 10:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
The following users thank CaptainBlack for this useful post:
Donate to MHF
  #5  
Old June 27th, 2009, 10:12 AM
Sampras's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 201
Thanks: 28
Thanked 32 Times in 29 Posts
Sampras will become famous soon enough
Default

Wouldn't it depend whether a <0 or a \geq 0?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old June 30th, 2009, 04:12 PM
topsquark's Avatar
Generous Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Angelica, NY
Posts: 7,605
Country:
Thanks: 643
Thanked 2,305 Times in 2,093 Posts
topsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond reputetopsquark has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sampras View Post
Wouldn't it depend whether a <0 or a \geq 0?
This is from a rocket motion equation. a will be positive for any case I'm considering.

-Dan
__________________
Got a Physics question? Come on over to
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain." - The Litany Against Fear, "Dune" by Frank Herbert
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc.
©2005 - 2009 Math Help Forum


Math Help Forum is a community of maths forums with an emphasis on maths help in all levels of mathematics.
Register to post your math questions or just hang out and try some of our math games or visit the arcade.