Actually, is there a relationship in regression when changing values?

Soley101
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
Hello, I've just started learning about regression. While working on some problems I noticed that one problem set had exactly the x,y values swapped. And as you know when you switch the points that's normally an inverse, but the regression doesn't show that pattern as the regression values are not inverses. I expected them to be the inverses but they are not. How do I explain that..maybe I don't fully understand what regression is.

For instance (I don't have my calc on me but I assure you I know how to do the regression) but I am mean let's say there are 3 coordinates 2,2 3,4 6,6 then the reverse would be 2,2 4,3 6,6. But the regressions are not identical. so is there a pattern or relationship? lol i go crazy at this hour.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
There is no simple relationship between the coefficients obtained in the two regressions. Look at the formula for slope when you regress y on x. Switching the roles of the two variables gives the formula for the ''slope'' when you regress x on y.
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top