Curve Fit, Correlation, and Computer Software

Soaring Crane
Messages
461
Reaction score
0
A computer program, MicroLab, deals with finding the best fit curve, or allowing for linear regression of the first, second, and third orders, of a given set of data (particularly modeling nonlinear data).

I am trying to stimulate this analysis on a graphing calculator (i.e., TI-83 Plus and TI-84 Silver Edition) used in some statistics courses. However, I am confused about how to define the second and third orders before executing the command to find the regression line’s equation/correlation. For the second (quadratic) order curve fit choice, do I plot the original y-values versus the square of the x-values? Based on the same concept, do I plot the original y-values versus x-values cubed for the third (cubic) order curve fit choice?

Thank you for your time.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yep; a third-order regression line would be y = b0 + b1x + b2x2 + b3x3 + u.
 
Really? Um, could you explain that long part there for me, pretty please? I'm sure it's not that overwhelming once one understands a few principles, but I got lost in the variables . . . :blushing:

Thanks again!
 
Suppose you have a general 2nd-order polynomial:

y - y0 = a1(x - x0) + a2(x - x0)2

or

y = y0 + a1x - a1x0 + a2x2 + a2x02 - 2a2x02x

Re-write it as:

y = b0 + b1x + b2x2

where
b0 = y0 - a1x0 + a2x02 = sum of the constant terms
b1 = a1 - 2a2x02 = sum of the coefficients of x
b2 = a2 = coefficient of x2

You can generalize this to an arbitrary order.
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top