Solving response surface for 0

  • Thread starter Thread starter JT14
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Response Surface
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around rearranging a response surface analysis equation to find when P=0, which results in a conic section rather than a simple function. The original poster, Jono, is trying to model bacterial growth rates based on temperature and water levels but struggles to derive a boundary function. Responses suggest that the boundary does not necessarily need to be expressed as a function, as growth and non-growth regions can be defined by curves that do not fit the y=f(x) format. It is recommended to visualize the equation using contour plots to understand the shape of the boundary better. Ultimately, the complexity of the equation may prevent a straightforward solution, emphasizing the need for flexibility in modeling approaches.
JT14
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I've done a response surface analysis, resulting in an equation of the form:

P= A + B*X + C*X^2 + D*Y + E*Y^2 + F*X*Y

Where A,B,C,D,E, and F are known values.

I want to rearrange the equation so I can get a polynomial describing when P=0, but I'm stuck.

Any suggestions?

Thanks,

Jono
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Your equation is a quadratic form. You generally will not be able to solve it in the form y = f(x). Such an equation (with P = 0) describes a conic section (ellipses, hypberbolas, etc).

See this wikipedia page for details about how to identify which conic section your equation gives you.
 
I see... So I guess I need to re-think how I've done things.

I have a bunch of bacteria growth rates at different temperatures and water levels, and want to whack a curve on it that describes the boundary between growth and no growth for x (temp) and y(water). I've been playing around with response surfaces and binary logistic regressions, but I can't figure out how to get the resulting equations to give me an y=f(x) that describes the boundary.

Thanks for your help, it has been very useful.

J.
 
Why does the boundary have to be a function? Couldn't there be regions of growth and non-growth that are bounded by curves that can't be described by a form y = f(x)?

If you plot P(x,y) = 0 (e.g., using the contour-plot in Mathematica), what does the curve look like given your numbers A...E? Depending on your constants, it could be possible that the resulting curve could be described by a function for x > 0 and y > 0. For example, the curve

(x-2)^2 + y^2 = 4

is a conic section, and obviously a circle. You can't solve it exactly as y = f(x), although you can split it into two functions: y = \pm \sqrt{4-(x-2)^2}. In this case, if you only care about x > 0, y > 0, you only need the y = + \sqrt{4-(x-2)^2} solution.

Depending on your parameters, something similar could happen for your case, but in general it won't. However, again, I'm not sure why your boundary must be a function y = f(x)?
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top