1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Integral equivalent to fitting a curve to a sum of functions

  1. Jan 5, 2016 #1

    I am searching for some kind of transform if it is possible, similar to a fourier transform, but for an arbitrary function.

    Sort of an inverse convolution but with a kernel that varies in each point.

    Or, like I say in the title of this topic a sort of continuous equivalent of fitting a curve to a sum of functions.

    For example if I want to use Gaussians, I want to reproduce a function [tex] F(x) [/tex]


    [tex] F(x) = \int \frac{f(y)}{\sqrt{4\pi t(y)}}e^{-\frac{(x-y)^2}{4 t(y)}} dy [/tex]

    Notice how t is a function of y.
    This is easy for a finite sum of Gaussians with linear regression, but I'm searching for a continuous equivalent.

    The closest thing that I found for Gausses is a Weierstrass transform. But the 'standard deviation' of the gausses doesn't vary in each point.

    There are a ton of subjects that come close (linear regression, inverse convolution, Weierstrass transform,..) but they either are discrete or lack the variability of the convoluting kernel.

    Does someone know a mathematical technique that can do this? Or know in what direction I have to look?

  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 5, 2016 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    I'm not quite clear on what is given. Obviously F is given, and you want to find f, but how about t? Is t(y) a given function?
  4. Jan 7, 2016 #3
    Yes, t(y) and f(y) are functions that I want fo find, yes. Maybe I should have written it explicitly like that instead of implying it by saying the the kernel was variable.
  5. Jan 7, 2016 #4


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    From my reading of the subject (totally new to me until I saw your post) the Weierstrass transform is exactly that, a transform, so is, generally speaking, invertible. This means there is not enough information to find t. Your mission would make more sense if t(y) were given. Am I missing something?

    Not sure if this is what you are after, but look at the discussion of heteroscedastic Gaussian Processes at https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~andrewgw/andrewgwthesis.pdf
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2016
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook