I Calculate top of curve, and the time it takes to get there

Pengatom
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm doing a lot of temperature measurement, and I would like to add a function that could estimate how high the temperature would rise and how long it will take to get there.
The calculations would be based on the current temperature relative to the past x measurements.
Anyone have any ideas as to how I should proceed to solve this?
Any help would be highly appreciated!

Pengatom

My example is for temperature, but I guess it could be used for anything really, that's why I posted it under General Math, please feel free to move it if it is under the wrong topic
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hi Pengatom:

If I understand your problem correctly, you want to extrapolate from experimental data to a range outside the range of the measured data. My personal experience with this kind of problem is somewhat limited, but I will share some general principles that have been useful to me.

If the desired extrapolations are relatively small compared to the range of measurements, and the data is relatively smooth, then a linear extrapolation will give a reasonable value. It is very difficult to get a reasonable extrapolated value to a range somewhat far from the measured range. For a higher order polynomial fit, the error of the extrapolated value will generally grow rapidly with the extent of extrapolation, and the error will also grow more rapidly with a larger exponent in the polynomial.

If you have a theoretical reason for expecting a particular kind of function to fit the quantities being measured over a larger range than the actual measurements, then you can find the best fitting value of set of free parameters for such a function type.

Hope this is helpful.

Regards,
Buzz
 
I did a somewhat similar approximation several years ago, where the object was to describe a population consisting of the (noisy) sum of two gaussian distributions plus something in between. I rapidly found that classical approximation theory did not work, so I did a recursive approximation:
  1. Used a low-pass filter to find the approximate value of the first top
  2. Used a quadratical regression to find a parabola through the top and several points to each side
  3. Used the parabola to find a first gaussian approximation to that part of the data
  4. Subtracted the values given by the first approximation from the data.
  5. Repeated 1 - 3 in order to find the second top and the second gaussian approximation
  6. Subtracted the values given by the second approximation from the data
  7. Repeated 1 - 5 in order to find better gaussian approximations to that part of the data
  8. Repeated 1 - 7 a couple of times until the result seemed stable
Not that my method would help you too much, but you might get an idea. If you have any inkling of what type of curve you would expect, find a method where you can use a try - refine sort of approach.
 
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