Construct a mathematical formula

adan
Messages
13
Reaction score
3
Hello,
I have been thinking of it for a long time, and I would appreciate suggestions from math experts.

I am working on a simulation of human agents. I want to set up a formula that defines the consumption probability (0,1), which consists of X, a value between 0 and 1, and two positive and negative integer values (0,1). The idea is to combine these variables. If positive influence is high, consumption should increase if negative influence is high, consumption should decrease. X represents personal belief without any influence.
The X and the influences variables are computed differently.

I thought of a weighted sum but that doesn't give the expected output.

Thank you!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
adan said:
I thought of a weighted sum but that doesn't give the expected output.
A weighted sum is the obvious first choice; what do you mean 'doesn't give the expected output'?

Did you set the weights manually - if so have you fully explored how your model responds to adjusting the weights?

If you have a sample 'expected output' have you tried fitting the weights using linear regression? Have you tried different optimisation functions (e.g. mean absolute error (MAE) as well as mean squared error (MSE))?

If this is still not working for you then this may be due to the inherent limitation of linearity of the model. To break through this you could consider using a neural net (a weighted sum is essentially a neural net with no hidden layers and a single neuron with a linear activation function in the output layer). However this is probably overkill for such a simple model with only 3 inputs.
 
Consider a portfolio of at least two stocks, take the consumption as the expectation value of returns, and the influences as the covariances.
 
pbuk said:
A weighted sum is the obvious first choice; what do you mean 'doesn't give the expected output'?

Did you set the weights manually - if so have you fully explored how your model responds to adjusting the weights?

If you have a sample 'expected output' have you tried fitting the weights using linear regression? Have you tried different optimisation functions (e.g. mean absolute error (MAE) as well as mean squared error (MSE))?

If this is still not working for you then this may be due to the inherent limitation of linearity of the model. To break through this you could consider using a neural net (a weighted sum is essentially a neural net with no hidden layers and a single neuron with a linear activation function in the output layer). However this is probably overkill for such a simple model with only 3 inputs.
Thank you @pbuk, for your answer!. I noticed that the weighted sum doesn't give what I expect. I don't have data but just some intuition. For example consumption = w1*X +w2 * Infpositive - w2 * infnegative.
I assume w1 should not be too small(> 0.5). I found that using the weighted sum can't enforce the positive effect. I use a negative weight w2 to achieve the negative influence.
 
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