How to decompose the following expression?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Alec V
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Expression
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the decomposition of a mathematical expression derived from a research paper. Participants are attempting to transform one equation (Eq. 1) into another (Eq. 2) using various mathematical techniques, including partial fractions and simplifications. The focus is on the relationships between the symbols involved and the mathematical manipulations required to achieve the desired form.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in deriving Eq. 2 from Eq. 1 and requests assistance.
  • Another suggests reversing the process, indicating that simplifying Eq. 2 may lead back to Eq. 1.
  • Several participants emphasize the need for clarity regarding the meanings of the symbols involved, particularly the variables representing profit and risk in different countries.
  • A participant provides a numerical test that produced consistent results, although they acknowledge the need for verification of their program.
  • One participant proposes a method to express a difference of fractions in terms of simpler components, introducing a leftover term (L) that requires further simplification.
  • Another participant seeks clarification on how to separate the simpler fractions from the more complex expression involving the leftover term.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to decompose the expression, and multiple competing views and methods are presented throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the definitions and relationships among the symbols are crucial for understanding the problem, and there are indications of unresolved mathematical steps in the proposed approaches.

Alec V
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
This comes from one of the research papers that I'm reading. The authors decompose Eq. 1 and obtain Eq. 2. After several attempts, I have been fairly unsuccessful at obtaining Eq. 2 from Eq. 1.

I have tried using partial fractions decomposition without much success. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Eq. 1


20-%20%5Cfrac%7B%5Cprod_%7Bs2%7D%20%7D%7B1-%5Cdelta%20+%5Cdelta%20%5Cepsilon%20_%7Bs2%7D%7D.gif


Eq. 2

gif.gif
Thanks!


 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Try to find the other direction, that is easier (and all steps work both ways). You can simplify equation 2 and get equation 1.
 
Alec V said:
Eq. 2

gif.gif


You have to explain the relations that exist among the symbols to get help on this question.
 
Alec V said:
Eq. 2
gif.gif


Stephen Tashi said:
You have to explain the relations that exist among the symbols to get help on this question.
Yes, especially ##\Pi_{s1}## and ##\Pi_{sS2}##. Are they just numbers or is something else going on? The symbol ##\Pi## is usually used to denote a product.
 
Sorry, I should have clarified. ∏s1 is profit in country 1, ∏s2 is profit in country 2, ∈s1 is risk in country 1, ∈s2 is risk in country 2, and δ is the discount rate.

Eq. 2 tries to separate risk elements (∈s1 and ∈s2) from the profit gap between countries. Hope this helps.
 
∏ as variable is a bit unusual, but as long as all symbols are just variables, their meaning does not matter. This just needs the basic rules to work with fractions.
 
The results of a simple numerical test did produce identical answers for EPV. (Of course someone should check my program.)
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>void main()

{double pi_1, pi_2, delta, ep_1, ep_2;
double frac1,frac2, numerator, denom1, denom2;
double epv_1, epv_2;
pi_1 = 10.0;
pi_2 = 30.0;
delta = 0.25;
ep_1 = 6.0;
ep_2 = 5.0;
printf("pi_1 = %6.3f pi_2 = %6.3f delta = %6.3f ep_1 = %6.3f ep_2 = %6.3f\n\n",pi_1,pi_2,delta,ep_1,ep_2);

denom1 = 1.0 - delta + delta * ep_1;
frac1 = pi_1/denom1;
printf("frac1 %6.4f\n", frac1);
denom2 = 1.0 - delta + delta * ep_2;
frac2 = pi_2/denom2;
printf("frac2 %6.4f\n",frac2);
epv_1 = frac1 - frac2;
printf("epv_1 = %6.3f\n\n",epv_1);

frac1 = (pi_1 - pi_2)/ (1.0 - delta);
printf("frac1 %6.4f\n", frac1);
frac2 = ( delta * ( denom1 * ep_2 * pi_2 - denom2 * ep_1 * pi_1) )/ ((1.0 - delta)*denom1* denom2 );
printf("frac2 %6.4f\n",frac2);
epv_2 = frac1 + frac2;
printf("epv_2 = %6.3f\n", epv_2);}

The output

pi_1 = 10.000 pi_2 = 30.000 delta = 0.250 ep_1 = 6.000 ep_2 = 5.000

frac1 4.4444
frac2 15.0000
epv_1 = -10.556

frac1 -26.6667
frac2 16.1111
epv_2 = -10.556
 
Getting rid of terms in a denominator that don't cancel with anything in the numerator is a frequent mathematical daydream. Suppose we approach the problem as the desire to express:

[itex]( \frac{A}{W + F} - \frac{B}{W + G})[/itex] as [itex]( \frac{A}{W} - \frac{B}{W}) \ + \ L[/itex]

where [itex]L[/itex] is the leftover stuff.

Then
[itex]L = \frac{A}{W+F} - \frac{A}{W} - \frac{B}{W + G} + \frac{B}{W }[/itex]

[itex]= \frac{ AW - A(W+F)} {W(W+F)} + \frac{-BW+B(W+G)}{W(W+G)}[/itex]

[itex]= \frac{-AF}{W(W+F)} + \frac{BG}{W(W+G)}[/itex]

[itex]= \frac{1}{W} ( \frac{BG}{W+G} - \frac{AF}{W+F})[/itex]

In the problem at hand, there are relations between [itex]W, F, G[/itex]

[itex]W = 1 -\delta[/itex]
[itex]F = \delta \epsilon_1 = (1-W)\epsilon_1[/itex]
[itex]G = \delta \epsilon_2 = (1-W)\epsilon_2[/itex]

Substituting in selected places for [itex]F[/itex] and [itex]G[/itex]

[itex]L = \frac{1}{W}( \frac{B(1-W)\epsilon_2}{W+G} - \frac{A(1-W)\epsilon_1}{W+F} )[/itex]

[itex]= \frac{1-W}{W} ( \frac{ \epsilon_2 B}{W+G} - \frac{\epsilon_1 A}{W+F})[/itex]

[itex]= \frac{1-W}{W} ( \frac{ (W+F)\epsilon_2 B - (W+G)\epsilon_1A}{(W+G)(W+F)})[/itex]

In the problem at hand:
[itex]A = \prod_{s1}[/itex]
[itex]B = \prod_{s2}[/itex]
[itex]W = (1 -\delta)[/itex]
[itex]F = \delta \epsilon_{s1}[/itex]
[itex]G = \delta \epsilon_{s2}[/itex]
[itex]\epsilon_1 = \epsilon_{s1}[/itex]
[itex]\epsilon_2 = \epsilon_{s2}[/itex].
 
Stephen Tashi said:
Getting rid of terms in a denominator that don't cancel with anything in the numerator is a frequent mathematical daydream. Suppose we approach the problem as the desire to express:

[itex]( \frac{A}{W + F} - \frac{B}{W + G})[/itex] as [itex]( \frac{A}{W} - \frac{B}{W}) \ + \ L[/itex]

where [itex]L[/itex] is the leftover stuff.

Then
[itex]L = \frac{A}{W+F} - \frac{A}{W} - \frac{B}{W + G} + \frac{B}{W }[/itex]

[itex]= \frac{ AW - A(W+F)} {W(W+F)} + \frac{-BW+B(W+G)}{W(W+G)}[/itex]

[itex]= \frac{-AF}{W(W+F)} + \frac{BG}{W(W+G)}[/itex]

[itex]= \frac{1}{W} ( \frac{BG}{W+G} - \frac{AF}{W+F})[/itex]

In the problem at hand, there are relations between [itex]W, F, G[/itex]

[itex]W = 1 -\delta[/itex]
[itex]F = \delta \epsilon_1 = (1-W)\epsilon_1[/itex]
[itex]G = \delta \epsilon_2 = (1-W)\epsilon_2[/itex]

Substituting in selected places for [itex]F[/itex] and [itex]G[/itex]

[itex]L = \frac{1}{W}( \frac{B(1-W)\epsilon_2}{W+G} - \frac{A(1-W)\epsilon_1}{W+F} )[/itex]

[itex]= \frac{1-W}{W} ( \frac{ \epsilon_2 B}{W+G} - \frac{\epsilon_1 A}{W+F})[/itex]

[itex]= \frac{1-W}{W} ( \frac{ (W+F)\epsilon_2 B - (W+G)\epsilon_1A}{(W+G)(W+F)})[/itex]

In the problem at hand:
[itex]A = \prod_{s1}[/itex]
[itex]B = \prod_{s2}[/itex]
[itex]W = (1 -\delta)[/itex]
[itex]F = \delta \epsilon_{s1}[/itex]
[itex]G = \delta \epsilon_{s2}[/itex]
[itex]\epsilon_1 = \epsilon_{s1}[/itex]
[itex]\epsilon_2 = \epsilon_{s2}[/itex].
Thanks so much! The simplification of L makes sense. Could you please dwell on how to separate [itex]( \frac{A}{W} - \frac{B}{W})[/itex] from [itex]( \frac{A}{W + F} - \frac{B}{W + G})[/itex]?
 
  • #10
Alec V said:
. Could you please dwell on how to separate [itex]( \frac{A}{W} - \frac{B}{W})[/itex] from [itex]( \frac{A}{W + F} - \frac{B}{W + G})[/itex]?

I'm not sure what you are asking.
 
  • #11
Stephen Tashi said:
I'm not sure what you are asking.

So, we expressed [itex]( \frac{A}{W + F} - \frac{B}{W + G})[/itex] as [itex]( \frac{A}{W} - \frac{B}{W}) \ + \ L[/itex]. You then proceed to further simplify the leftover stuff. However, how can we get from [itex]( \frac{A}{W + F} - \frac{B}{W + G})[/itex] to [itex]( \frac{A}{W} - \frac{B}{W}) \ + \ L[/itex]?

Thanks.
 
  • #12
Alec V said:
However, how can we get from [itex]( \frac{A}{W + F} - \frac{B}{W + G})[/itex] to [itex]( \frac{A}{W} - \frac{B}{W}) \ + \ L[/itex]?

I just defined [itex]L[/itex] to be [itex]( \frac{A}{W + F} - \frac{B}{W + G}) - ( \frac{A}{W} - \frac{B}{W})[/itex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K