Finding value of parameters to fit some data

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding optimal values for parameters a, b, and c in a non-linear function f, based on measured data from a physical experiment involving two parameters, energy (E) and length (L). The context includes numerical integration and optimization techniques to fit the model to the data.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the relationship between measured data yE,L and the parameters E and L, noting that they have calculated values for εE,L(k*v) for all E and L.
  • Another participant questions the clarity of the data, specifically the relationship between E, L, and v, and asks if there are multiple control variables in the experiment.
  • A participant clarifies that they used 3 different values of L and 5 different values of E, resulting in 15 data points for yE,L.
  • There is a suggestion to formulate the problem as an optimization problem to minimize a function related to the parameters a, b, and c, with potential constraints on their values.
  • Another participant proposes using numerical techniques such as simulated annealing or conjugate gradient methods for solving the optimization problem.
  • One participant introduces a function g(E,L,a,b,c) and suggests a method for minimizing the variance of the function values across the different parameter combinations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty about the nature of the data and the relationship between the variables. There is no consensus on the best method for fitting the parameters, as various optimization techniques and formulations are proposed without agreement on a single approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the lack of a known value for the constant in the original equation, which may affect the fitting process. There are also assumptions regarding the positivity and bounds of the parameters a, b, and c that remain unverified.

imsolost
Messages
18
Reaction score
1
The problem is the following :

I have some measured data's obtained when measuring a physical process. Let's call these : yE,L where E and L are 2 physical parameters of the experiment (an energy and a length).

I also know that :

$$\frac{y_{E,L}}{\sum_{k=1} ^{k=100} {\epsilon_{E,L} (k * v) * f(k*v|a,b,c) }} = constant$$ for all E, L.

where f(x|a,b,c) is a known, non-linear, parametrized function with 3 parameters that needs a fit : a, b, c. whose I know the expression of (I don't write it here because its quite long with some exponentials but I hope you get the idea).

I have no analytical expression for ##\epsilon_{E,L}(x)## but I can calculate separately each of the 100 different ##\epsilon_{E,L}(k*v)## values so I know the value of all ##\epsilon_{E,L}(k*v)## above for all E and L.

What algorithm or calculation method should I use to get a best-fit for a,b,c ?edit : trying to get the latex code working but smthing's wrong -_-' <Moderator's note: fixed>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
imsolost said:
so I know the value of all ##\epsilon_{E,L}(k*v)## above for all E and L.

It isn't clear what you data is. For example, do ##E## and ##L## have any definite relation to "##v##"?

In a simple experimental scenario, data has the form of ordered pairs (x,y). One controls the value of x and measures the value of y. Do you have more than one "control" variable?
 
Stephen Tashi said:
It isn't clear what you data is. For example, do ##E## and ##L## have any definite relation to "##v##"?

In a simple experimental scenario, data has the form of ordered pairs (x,y). One controls the value of x and measures the value of y. Do you have more than one "control" variable?

Using your notation (x,y), then your "y" is my ##y_{E,L}##. Your "x" is my couple of variables (E, L). Basically, during my experiment, I changed L (I used 3 different values of L) and E (i used 5 different values of E) for a total of 3x15 data points ##y_{E,L}##. I guess this should be enough to find 3 parameters a, b, c.

"v" is just an interval : the denominator of my expression comes from a simple rectangle numerical integration (I forgot a *v in the expression inside the sum btw). So basically, I had something in the denominator like ##\int_{0}^{100*v}{\epsilon_{E,L} (r) * f(r|a,b,c)*dr} ##.

I hope this clarifies my problem. Any help would be really appreciated.
 
Is the value of "constant" known?
 
No, I don't know its value.
 
(I used 3 different values of L) and E (i used 5 different values of E) for a total of 3x15 data points yE,L
I assume you mean 3x5 = 15 data points.

You could formulate the problem as an optimization problem - to find values of a,b,c that minimize a certain function subject to certain constraints on a,b,c (if there are any - e.g. perhaps some of the parameters need to be positive or within known bounds).

There are various numerical techniques for solving such optimization problems, such as "simulated annealing" and "conjugate gradient".

let the function that is supposed to be some common constant for a given value of ##E,L## be ##g(E,L,a,b,c)##.

Let ##h(a,b,c) = \sum_{i=1}^5 \sum_{j=1}^3 g(E_i,L_j,a,b,c)## and ##\bar{h} = \frac{ h(a,b,c)} {15}##

Let the function to minimize be ##s(a,b,c) = \sum_{i=1}^5 \sum_{j=1}^3 ( g(E_i,L_j,a,b,c) - \bar{h})^2## which is proportional to the sample variance of the functions ##g(E_i,L_j,a,b,c)##. If each of the functions ##g(E_i,L_j,a,b,c)## had the same common value, the variance would be zero.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K