Calculating error in coefficients determined from fitting a curve to data?

pergradus
Messages
137
Reaction score
1
I have a set of data points (x0, y0), (x1, y1), ... (xi, yi)

With each yi there is an associated error ei.

The data is modeled by the function:

y = a\exp(-bln^2(c/x))

I have determined values for the coefficients a, b, c and I know the residuals produced from the values of the coefficients I've calculated and the set of data. What I'm trying to do now is to calculate the error, or uncertainty if you prefer, associated with each coefficient. How do I go about this?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
A rough approach could be this one:

if you calculated the coefficients a, b, and c starting from your data, it means you have at your disposal a formula for theese coefficients. For example

a = a (x_1,\dots,x_n,y_1,\dots,y_n)

Then you could write

\Delta a = \sum_{k=1}^n\frac{\partial a}{\partial y_k}\epsilon_k
 
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top