Help with the 3D gaussian function

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the 3D Gaussian function, specifically the formula z=A*exp( (x-xo)^2/(2σx^2)+(y-yo)^2/(2σy^2)). The user seeks clarification on why setting σx=σy=1 results in a function that appears limited to the range of -3 to 3, despite the function theoretically extending to infinity. It is noted that the function approaches zero for values of |x-x0| or |y-y0| much larger than 3. A method to determine σx and σy graphically is suggested, using the Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) approach to measure the curve's width at half its peak value. This method allows for the conversion of measured widths into the respective sigma values for both dimensions.
PythagoreLove
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I need help with the gaussian function in 3D. I'm using the form:
z=A*exp( (x-xo)^2/(2σx^2)+(y-yo)^2/(2σy^2))

I know that A is the amplitude and xo,yo are the center coordinate.

I found that formula on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_function and they say that σx and σy are the spread of the blob. But if I put σx=σy=1, the function is from -3 to 3... Why is that ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They only plotted it from -3 to 3. It extends to +/-infinity in both x and y, but once |x-x0|/sigmax is much larger than 3.0, the value of the function is very close to zero.
 
But is there a pretty good way to find σx and σy, graphically speaking. I have a gaussian curve and want to find what is the function.
 
A good way is to use FWHM(Full Width at Half Maximum). In other words, you measure the width of the curve at half of the peak value. This is then easily converted into sigma using the formula on this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fwhm

Since you have a 2D Gaussian, you need to measure the FWHM in the x-direction with y=y0 to find sigmax, then do the same in the y-direction with x=x0 to find sigmay.
 
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K