Circular Error Probability in polar error expression

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the expression of Circular Error Probability (CEP) in terms of polar coordinates, specifically focusing on the variables \(\sigma_r\) and \(\sigma_\theta\) instead of \(\sigma_x\) and \(\sigma_y\). Participants explore the implications of correlation between these variables and the challenges of extending the CEP to Spherical Error Probability (SEP) in three dimensions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the standard form of CEP in Cartesian coordinates and seeks to reformulate it in polar coordinates, expressing concerns about the correlation between \(\sigma_x\) and \(\sigma_y\).
  • Another participant points out a typographical error in the expression for \(y\) and suggests that the final expression for \(P(r)\) is incorrect, recommending the substitution of \(x\) and \(y\) in terms of \(r\) and \(\theta\).
  • The original poster acknowledges the typo and questions whether it is feasible to express \(P(r)\) solely in terms of \(\sigma_r\) and \(\sigma_\theta\), considering the need to substitute back into the original Cartesian expression.
  • One participant suggests calculating the variances in polar coordinates based on the Cartesian variances, noting that it appears to be complex.
  • Another participant mentions that if the variances in \(x\) and \(y\) are equal, the resulting distribution in polar coordinates would yield a uniform angle and an exponential distribution for \(r^2\).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of reformulating CEP in polar coordinates without correlation issues. There is no consensus on the correctness of the proposed expressions or the approach to extending the discussion to SEP.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity involved in transitioning from Cartesian to polar coordinates, particularly regarding the correlation of variances and the implications for the distribution of errors.

dbeeo
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
After doing various searching through the google, most of the circular error probability I found are expressed interm of [tex]\sigma_x[/tex] and [tex]\sigma_y[/tex], which the CEP(circular error probability) usually looks like (assume normal distribution):

[tex]P(r) = \int\int \exp^{-.5(\frac{x^2}{\sigma_x^2}+\frac{y^2}{\sigma_y^2})} dxdy[/tex]

or if we integrate the equation in term of polar coordinate

[tex]P(r) = \int\int \exp^{-.5(\frac{x^2}{\sigma_x^2}+\frac{y^2}{\sigma_y^2})} rd\theta dr[/tex]

However, these equations are based on no correlation between [tex]\sigma_x[/tex] and [tex]\sigma_y[/tex]. And also, both [tex]\sigma_x[/tex] and [tex]\sigma_y[/tex] remains constant disregarding the change of [tex]r[/tex] and [tex]\theta[/tex]. Although we usually can express both [tex]x[/tex] and [tex]y[/tex] in term of [tex]r[/tex] and [tex]\theta[/tex],

[tex]x=r\cos(\theta)[/tex] and [tex]y=r\sin(t\theta)[/tex]

But right now, I would like to have the CEP to express in [tex]r[/tex] and [tex]\theta[/tex] only, since the error I will have are [tex]\sigma_\theta[/tex] and [tex]\sigma_r[/tex], and I would like to avoid the correlation issue. So, I'm just not know that if this equation will make sense or not,

[tex]P(r) = \int\int \exp^{-.5(\frac{r^2}{\sigma_r^2}+\frac{\theta^2}{\sigma_\theta^2})} rd\theta dr[/tex]

Anyone has any input/idea about this? One of the other problem is that I need to expand the CEP into spherical error probability (SEP), which is in the 3dimensional. Although I have a paper to show somewhat a close form solution for this problem, however they still consider [tex]\sigma_x[/tex] and [tex]\sigma_y[/tex] with correlation as their error instead of [tex]\sigma_\theta[/tex] and [tex]\sigma_r[/tex]. But the complexity just increases way too high if I'm following this method.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your y expression has a t in it - seems to have come from nowhere. Your final P(r) is just wrong. Plug in the expressions for x and y as functions of r and θ to get the correct integral in polar coordinates.
 
it was a typo for y expression, it should be,

[tex]y=r\sin(\theta)[/tex]

For the final P(r), I'm trying to find the other way that involve both [tex]\sigma_r[/tex] and [tex]\sigma_\theta[/tex]. So it seems like it is impossible unless i substitute them into the following expression?

[tex]P(r) = \int\int \exp^{-.5(\frac{x^2}{\sigma_x^2}+\frac{y^2}{\sigma_y^2})} rd\theta dr[/tex]
 
Have you tried calculating the r and θ variances in terms of the x and y variances? Off hand it looks messy.
 
If you consider the case where the x and y variances are the same, the resultant polar coordinates have a distribution where the angle is uniform over a circle and r2 has an exponential distribution.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K