B How can we accurately model data using curve fitting techniques?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter houlahound
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Data Fit
AI Thread Summary
Accurate data modeling using curve fitting techniques raises questions about the theoretical foundations behind polynomial fits. While a polynomial of degree 2 can perfectly fit the coordinates of a hanging chain, it does not provide insight into the underlying physics, which is better described by a catenary curve derived from theoretical analysis. This disconnect highlights a common issue in science where empirical data can yield precise equations without theoretical justification, as seen in examples from AI applications in physics and biology. The evolution of scientific theories, such as gravitation, demonstrates the importance of understanding key variables rather than relying solely on fitted curves. Ultimately, while polynomial fits can be useful, they may obscure deeper insights into the phenomena being studied.
houlahound
Messages
907
Reaction score
223
While using a piece of jewelry ie a fine chain hanging against a piece of graph paper then placing an origin, axes and scale on the paper I collected the position of the chain as a set of coordinates (x,y).

Entering the data into curve fitting software a perfect fit for a polynomial degree 2 was obtained.

Also fitted the data to a catenary made of exponentials.

My question is what does it mean to say the theoretical curve to model some data is this when you can adjust any polynomial within reason to get the same fit.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
We know that when you hang a chain you get a catenary. We also know that you can approximate a catenary within a given domain using a polynomial.

You were approaching the problem from the measurement end to get your polynomial and that's where you have to stop. You have no theory to explain the polynomial fit or why you came up with a polynomial. This happens a lot in science where the data is neatly described by a polynomial but there's no theory to explain it.

In one example, Cornell Univ folks had developed an AI that could discern the equations of motion from data about a compound pendulum and the equations were spot on. However later a biology team used the same program to analyze some cell data and once again they got a equation that was spot on but they couldn't publish because they couldn't explain the equation from theory.

In contrast, the catenary comes from analyzing the nature of the hanging chain and deriving the catenary from that analysis.
 
  • Like
Likes houlahound
thanks, so it's not so much a case of lack of rigour it is that a fitted curve gives no insight to what the key variables are?
 
Here's that article I mentioned on the program that "understands" physics:

https://www.wired.com/2009/04/Newtonai/

Another example could be the evolution of the theory of gravitation from the cycles of Ptolemy to Kepler's laws to Newton's Law of Gravitation to Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. In each case, a better equation was developed to address the ever more precise collected data.

Here's Feynman's lecture on this evolution:

http://www.cornell.edu/video/richard-feynman-messenger-lecture-1-law-of-gravitation
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes houlahound
I found this related article in Wired about how students do experiments which you may find interesting:

https://www.wired.com/2016/09/might-gotten-little-carried-away-physics-time/

In this case, the students graph their data and fit it to a quadratic which is the correct answer and perhaps this makes students want to believe that everything works the same way.

However, the world intrudes and may make things locally in your limited experiment match a polynomial okay but in a bigger sense with theory we can find a better answer...
 
  • Like
Likes houlahound
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...
Back
Top