Error propagation - inverse of an error

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the propagation of error when calculating the inverse of a squared value. It is established that the error in 1/t² can be derived from the known error in t, specifically using the relationship that the new percentage error of the square is half the old percentage error. The participants clarify that the fractional error in a quantity can be expressed using the binomial theorem, allowing for an approximation of the inverse error. Ultimately, the final answer for the inverse calculation is confirmed as correct, demonstrating the application of these error propagation principles. Understanding these concepts is crucial for accurate calculations in fields like engineering and physics.
emeraldskye177
Messages
26
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Let t = f(g, h, A, Δm, Γ, r). For t = 2 s, the propagated error is σ = 0.02 s.

Can the error of 1/t2 be simply determined using the known error in t = (2 ± 0.02) s, or must the variance formula (with all the partial derivatives and errors of each dependent variable) be re-derived?

Homework Equations



When squaring a quantity with an error, the new %error of the square is half the old %error.

I don't know how to find the inverse of an error (tried looking it up online but can't seem to find it).

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
t2 = (22 ± 1% / 2) s = (4 ± 0.5%) s

1/t2 = ?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
emeraldskye177 said:

Homework Statement



Let t = f(g, h, A, Δm, Γ, r). For t = 2 s, the propagated error is σ = 0.02 s.

Can the error of 1/t2 be simply determined using the known error in t = (2 ± 0.02) s, or must the variance formula (with all the partial derivatives and errors of each dependent variable) be re-derived?

Homework Equations



When squaring a quantity with an error, the new %error of the square is half the old %error.

I don't know how to find the inverse of an error (tried looking it up online but can't seem to find it).

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
t2 = (22 ± 1% / 2) s = (4 ± 0.5%) s

1/t2 = ?
It's not hard to figure out. If the fractional error in x as a measure of X is ε then X is x(1+/-ε). So 1/X is 1/(x(1+/-ε))=(1/x)(1+/-ε)-1.
You can use the binomial theorem to expand (1+/-ε)-1 and find the fractional error in 1/X.
 
haruspex said:
It's not hard to figure out. If the fractional error in x as a measure of X is ε then X is x(1+/-ε). So 1/X is 1/(x(1+/-ε))=(1/x)(1+/-ε)-1.
You can use the binomial theorem to expand (1+/-ε)-1 and find the fractional error in 1/X.
So, by what you're saying,

t = 2 ± 0.02 = 2 ± 1% = 2 × ( 1 ± 0.5% ) ...or should this be 2 × ( 1 ± 1% ) i.e. do I factor the 2 out of the error?

t
2 = 4 ± 0.5% = 4 × ( 1 ± ( 0.5% / 4 ) ) ...or should this be 4 × ( 1 ± 0.5% ) i.e. do I factor the 4 out of the error?

1/t2 = 1 / ( 4 × ( 1 ± ( 0.5% / 4 ) ) ) = ( 4 ± 0.5% )-1

Did I follow you correctly?
 
Last edited:
emeraldskye177 said:
should this be 2 × ( 1 ± 1% )
Yes. 2±0.02=2(1±0.01)
 
haruspex said:
Yes. 2±0.02=2(1±0.01)
So

t = 2 ± 1% = 2 * (1 ± 1%)

t2 = 4 ± 0.5% = 4 * (1 ± 0.5%)

1/t2 = 0.25 * (1 ± 0.5%)-1

How do I binomially expand something to the power of -1?
 
haruspex said:
No. How do you get that?
I think your ± X% notation is confusing you. Try writing it in factor form. Instead of mean value ± Percentage% write (mean value)(1± Percentage%). Thus, t=2(1± 0.01), so t2=4(1± 0.01)2=4(1± 0.02) approximately.
For negative powers, see e.g. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_theorem#Newton.27s_generalized_binomial_theorem
Sorry I just realized I was making a silly mistake. Since I was squaring t, I should've been doubling the %error (for some reason I was thinking of the rule for taking the square root, in which case the %error is halved). So you are correct; if t = 2 ± 1% then

t2 = 4 ± 2% = 4 * (1 ± 2%) = 4 * (1 ± 0.02)

I checked out the article... for (t2)-1 looks like I'm adding/subtracting powers of t for infinity? I don't know what to make of that. I'm studying computer engineering, I'm not that great at theoretical math.
 
Last edited:
emeraldskye177 said:
looks like I'm adding/subtracting powers of t for infinity?
Yes, but the terms get rapidly smaller for small values of the error inside the (). You only need to use the first two, the '1' and the next term.
So (1+x)-1 is approximately 1-x.
 
haruspex said:
Yes, but the terms get rapidly smaller for small values of the error inside the (). You only need to use the first two, the '1' and the next term.
So (1+x)-1 is approximately 1-x.
So, for |x| << 1,

(1 - x)-1 = 1 + x, correct?

So (1 ± x)-1 = 1 ± x

So in my example,

t2 = 4 ± 2% = 4 * (1 ± 2%)

1/t2 = 0.25 * (1 ± 2%)-1 = 0.25 * (1 ± 2%) = 0.25 ± 2% = 0.25 ± 0.005

Is my final answer (bolded) correct?
 
  • #10
emeraldskye177 said:
So, for |x| << 1,

(1 - x)-1 = 1 + x, correct?

So (1 ± x)-1 = 1 ± x

So in my example,

t2 = 4 ± 2% = 4 * (1 ± 2%)

1/t2 = 0.25 * (1 ± 2%)-1 = 0.25 * (1 ± 2%) = 0.25 ± 2% = 0.25 ± 0.005

Is my final answer (bolded) correct?
Yes.
 

Similar threads

Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K