Finding Equation to Describe Graph of Perceived vs Real Angles

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter PatternSeeker
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding an equation to describe the relationship between perceived and real angles of stimuli, particularly focusing on how errors in perceived angles correlate with the underestimation of lengths of stimuli. Participants explore methods for generating a formula that indicates where maximum error occurs, as well as how to quantify this maximum difference based on specific percentages of error in perceived lengths.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested, Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a graph showing that the difference between perceived and real angles increases with the percentage error in length estimation and seeks an equation to describe this relationship.
  • Another participant suggests that while there may not be an exact answer, a smooth function could be used to approximate the data, recommending bivariate interpolation methods like quadratic or cubic splines.
  • A different participant draws an analogy between the data and the trajectory of a ball shot from a cannon, implying a potential connection to physics concepts like wind resistance.
  • The original poster clarifies that they are looking for a formula to determine where maximum changes between reported and physical angles occur, influenced by both the percentage error in reported lengths and the physical angle of the stimuli.
  • The original poster expresses interest in using differential calculus to identify maximum errors or changes, indicating a willingness to engage with mathematical methods despite limited background.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on a specific method or formula. There are multiple competing views on how to approach the problem, with suggestions ranging from interpolation techniques to calculus methods, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion is based on hypothetical data, and participants acknowledge the complexity of the relationship between perceived and real angles, which may depend on various factors that are not fully defined.

PatternSeeker
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
I show a graph where errors in perceived angles of stimuli increase with the underestimation of lengths of stimuli. I want to find an equation that will describe when maximum error should occur. Specific questions are below. Please see the attached graph. I will be happy with any suggestions that will help me figure this out.

GRAPH DESCRIPTION
It shows a difference between perceived and real angles between edges of certain stimuli (Y-axis) as a function of real angles of stimuli (X-axis).
Separate lines are for different % errors in the perceived lengths of these stimuli. Negative values (-10 to -80 %) stand for % underestimation of lengths.

As you can see difference between perceived and real angles increases with % error in estimation of lengths.

MY QUESTIONS:
Do you have any suggestions about how to generate an equation that will describe this graph? How can I show, using an equation, where the maximum error in perceived angles should occur? That is at what angle (x-axis) would I observe the largest difference between perceived and real angles (y-axis)? Also, how can I show what is the maximum difference between perceived and real angles for specific % errors in perceived lengths?

I hope I am in the right forum :)
 

Attachments

  • OverestimationOfAngles01.jpg
    OverestimationOfAngles01.jpg
    31.7 KB · Views: 455
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think there is an exact answer to your question, but there likely is an acceptable one. If I understand your graph correctly, what you have here is data from a function of two variables, the real angle and the % deviation. You would like to approximate this data with a smooth function that interpolates the data and "fits well". You could then use this function to answer both of your questions, at least approximately.

I don't know your mathematical background, but what I would suggest is you look at bivariate interpolation. Your data looks pretty smooth and could probably be approximated well with a either bivariate quadratic or cubic splines. I just checked my version of Maple and it only has built in procedures for one dimensional splines. Too bad because perhaps I could have run your data for you.
 
Hi LC Kurtz,

Thank you for your kind email. This is not exactly what I was looking for though. What I'm after exactly is finding a formula that will tell me where the maximum change between reported and physical angles should occur as a function of (1) % error in reported lengths and (2) physical angle of stimuli.

The graph is based on hypothetical data. Here, the change between reported (perceived/estimated) and physical (i.e., real) angles varies as a function of (1) physical angles, (2) % error in reported lengths of stimuli. For example, as % error increases, the change between reported and physical angles also increases. The greatest change may occur at a specific physical angle. In one of my other threads, I gave a specific example of stimuli involved. Let me know if that would be helpful.
Now, I generated the graph, but it would like to find a formula where I can quickly show if maximum change should occur at a specific physical angle (e.g., 20 deg) given specific % error (e.g., 80 %).

If you had a suggestion regarding relevant methods in math, that would be be useful for me too. I was thinking of using differential calculus to find maximum errors/changes. I took undergraduate calculus a few years ago, that's about it, but I'm a quick study. :)
 
Thanks jedishrfu.
That does look interesting. I will take a look at this & see if I could use it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K