Can double convolutions be simplified using a change of variable?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter muzialis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convolution
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the simplification of double convolutions, specifically using a change of variable in the context of Stieltjes integrals. Participants explore the notation and definitions involved in convolution, as well as the implications of using different types of integrals.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a convolution integral and seeks to express a double convolution in a more compact form, particularly questioning the upper limit of integration in the inner integral.
  • Another participant requests clarification on the notation used, suggesting it may be engineering-related and questioning the meaning of the terms involved.
  • A participant clarifies their use of Stieltjes convolution notation and discusses the conditions under which a change of variable can be applied.
  • There is a suggestion to rephrase the question for clarity and to reference standard mathematical terminology.
  • One participant notes the absence of Stieltjes convolutions in Wikipedia and considers whether using Riemann integral notation would be more helpful.
  • A later reply questions whether the original inquiry pertains to performing a change of variable in a Stieltjes integral and suggests looking for relevant expositions.
  • Another participant rephrases their question to clarify the notation and expresses a desire to achieve a symmetric form for the double convolution using indicator functions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the clarity and appropriateness of the notation used for convolution. There is no consensus on the best approach to simplify the double convolution or on the definitions being applied.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the potential confusion arising from the notation and the need for clearer definitions. The discussion includes references to different types of integrals and their properties, but these remain unresolved.

muzialis
Messages
156
Reaction score
1
Let us write a convolution
$$\int_{0}^{t} A(t-\tau) \mathrm{d}x(\tau)$$ as
$$A \star \mathrm{d}x$$
I would like to write down the expression for the double convolution
$$A \star \mathrm{d}x \star \mathrm{d}x $$
Following the definition I obtain
$$ \int_{0}^{t} \int_{0} ^{t-\tau} A(t-\tau-s) \mathrm{d}x(s) \mathrm{d}x(\tau)$$
Can this be given a more compact form, especially in reference to the upper limit of integration in the inner integral?
I would like to perform the change of variable $$t-\tau = w$$ but unsure as to how to proceed, any hint would be the most appreciated, thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Explain what you mean by:

muzialis said:
Let us write a convolution
$$\int_{0}^{t} A(t-\tau) \mathrm{d}x(\tau)$$ as
$$A \star \mathrm{d}x$$

Perhaps you are using some notation known in engineering. However, in the usual mathematical terminology, one convolves two functions and if that's what your talking about, the notation doesn't make it clear if you are using are two functions.

For example if A() is the function defined by A(r) = 3r^2 + r + 1 then what does A * dx mean? In particular what would dx(\tau) be?
 
Stephen,

many thanks for your input.
I am not using an engineering notation, whatever yo mean by that, I am simply writing the convolution down as a Stijeltes convolution (using Stjeltes instead of Riemann integration), as the notation is more compact.
Under certain technical conditions which can definitely be assumed in the present case, one can write
$$\int_0^{t} A(t-\tau) \frac{\mathrm{d}g}{\mathrm{d}\tau}\mathrm{d}\tau$$
as
$$\int_0^{t} A(t-\tau) \mathrm{d}g(\tau)$$
(formally looking as a change of variable procedure)
Many thanks again, I hope this clarifies and you will help me further.
 
muzialis said:
I am simply writing the convolution down

Your notation needs some words to put it in context.

Which section of the wikipedia article on convolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolution refers to the type of convolution in your notation?
 
Well, there is no mention in Wikipedia of Stjeltes convolutions (although they are very strongly related to the measure theory approach described in the Section "Measure"), would it help if I edited my question using Riemann integrals notation?
 
Does you question amount to "How do we do a change of variable in a Stieltjes integral?" I'm not an expert on that topic, but perhaps we can find expositions about how to do it.
 
Stephen, you are right in pointing out that such notation is confusing. Let me then rephrase my question clearly:
Let us denote a convolution
$$\int_0^{t} A(t-\tau) x(\tau) \mathrm{d}\tau$$
With the notation
$$A \star x$$
I would like to write down the expression for the double convolution
$$A\star x \star x$$
Following the definition I could write
$$\int_{0}^{t} \int_0^{t-\tau} A(t-\tau-s) x(s)x(\tau)\mathrm{d}s \mathrm{d}\tau$$

Or, exploiting the associativity property
$$\int_0^{t} A(t-\tau) \int_{0}^{\tau} x(\tau-s)x(s)\mathrm{d}s \mathrm{d}\tau$$

But I would like to write the double convolution using double integrals with the same limits of integration, how can I achieve that (especially in the first of the two expression I wrote down)?
Many thanks
 
muzialis said:
Let us write a convolution
$$\int_{0}^{t} A(t-\tau) \mathrm{d}x(\tau)$$ as
$$A \star \mathrm{d}x$$
I would like to write down the expression for the double convolution
$$A \star \mathrm{d}x \star \mathrm{d}x $$
Following the definition I obtain
$$ \int_{0}^{t} \int_{0} ^{t-\tau} A(t-\tau-s) \mathrm{d}x(s) \mathrm{d}x(\tau)$$
Can this be given a more compact form, especially in reference to the upper limit of integration in the inner integral?
I would like to perform the change of variable $$t-\tau = w$$ but unsure as to how to proceed, any hint would be the most appreciated, thanks

If A(t) and x(t) have properties similar to probability CDFs, you could write the convolution integrals in symmetric form using indicator functions, eg $$\int\int I(t_1+t_2\le t)dA(t_1)dx(t_2)$$ - the three-way version should be fairly straight forward.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K