A How to check if a function doesn't depend on a variable?

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter kelly0303
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Variable
kelly0303
Messages
573
Reaction score
33
Hello! I have some experimental data points ##(z_i,dz_i)## and I know that in the most general case this variable can be written in terms of 2 other variables as ##z_i = ay_i+bx_i##. Beside ##z_i## I can also measure, for each point, ##x_i## (we can assume that the uncertainty in ##x_i## is negligible), but not ##y_i##. I suspect, based on some calculations, that (at least at the level of the experimental uncertainties, ##dz_i##) the ##bx_i## term will be negligible i.e. ##b\sim 0## given my uncertainties. Is there a way to test this experimentally, given my current data and the expected functional form? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
An important question is whether the ##x_i##s and ##y_i##s are independent or are correlated. If they are independent, then you can consider whether ##b \approx 0## without regard to the value of ##a##. But if they are related, you must consider the value of ##a## to understand whether the addition of a nonzero ##b## is beneficial.
Since you can not measure the ##y_i##s, I am afraid that the best you can do is to use regression to determine if the model ##z_i = a x_i## has a statistically significant non-zero ##a##.
 
In Calculus, the Inverse/Implicit function theorems are usually used with this purpose, when given an expression in terms of ##x,y ##.
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
30
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
28
Views
3K
Replies
30
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top