MHB Linearization of this equation / Inverse function

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on finding the inverse function of the equation y = a * (exp(-b * x) + c * (1 - exp(-b * x))). Initially, the user struggled with online tools that failed to provide a workable inverse function. After some attempts, the correct inverse function was derived as f^{-1}(x) = (1/b) * ln((a(1-c))/(x-ac)). The user clarified that the constant 'a' also affects the equation, leading to different results in their calculations. Ultimately, the problem was solved, confirming the feasibility of deriving the inverse function.
guiismiti
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I need to find the inverse function of the following equation

Code:
y = a * ((exp(-b * x)) + (c * (1 - (exp(-b * x)))))

Where a, b and c are constants.

I have experimental points that fit to this equation and I want to use these values in the inverse funtion to linearize it.

I have tried to use a few tools available online, but the output functions did not work, which made me think if it is actually possible to do it.Can anybody help me?
Thanks in advance.

Edited: solved
Code:
x = (1 / (-b)) * (LN(((a * c) - y) / (a * (c - 1))))
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
We are given:

$$f(x)=ae^{-bx}+c\left(1-e^{-bx}\right)=(a-c)e^{-bx}+c$$

To find the inverse function, we can write:

$$x=(a-c)e^{-by}+c$$

Solve for $y$:

$$x-c=(a-c)e^{-by}$$

$$\frac{x-c}{a-c}=e^{-by}$$

$$\ln\left(\frac{x-c}{a-c}\right)=-by$$

$$y=\frac{1}{b}\ln\left(\frac{a-c}{x-c}\right)$$

Thus, we may claim:

$$f^{-1}(x)=\frac{1}{b}\ln\left(\frac{a-c}{x-c}\right)$$
 
MarkFL said:
We are given:

$$f(x)=ae^{-bx}+c\left(1-e^{-bx}\right)=(a-c)e^{-bx}+c$$

To find the inverse function, we can write:

$$x=(a-c)e^{-by}+c$$

Solve for $y$:

$$x-c=(a-c)e^{-by}$$

$$\frac{x-c}{a-c}=e^{-by}$$

$$\ln\left(\frac{x-c}{a-c}\right)=-by$$

$$y=\frac{1}{b}\ln\left(\frac{a-c}{x-c}\right)$$

Thus, we may claim:

$$f^{-1}(x)=\frac{1}{b}\ln\left(\frac{a-c}{x-c}\right)$$

The constant 'a' also multiplies the second term, that's why we got different results.

$$f(x)=ae^{-bx}+ac\left(1-e^{-bx}\right)$$
 
guiismiti said:
The constant 'a' also multiplies the second term, that's why we got different results.

$$f(x)=ae^{-bx}+ac\left(1-e^{-bx}\right)$$

So it does...I missed that...lemme try again:


We are given:

$$f(x)=a\left(e^{-bx}+c\left(1-e^{-bx}\right)\right)=a(1-c)e^{-bx}+ac$$

To find the inverse function, we can write:

$$x=a(1-c)e^{-by}+ac$$

Solve for $y$:

$$x-ac=a(1-c)e^{-by}$$

$$\frac{x-ac}{a(1-c)}=e^{-by}$$

$$\ln\left(\frac{x-ac}{a(1-c)}\right)=-by$$

$$y=\frac{1}{b}\ln\left(\frac{a(1-c)}{x-ac}\right)$$

Thus, we may claim:

$$f^{-1}(x)=\frac{1}{b}\ln\left(\frac{a(1-c)}{x-ac}\right)$$
 
MarkFL said:
So it does...I missed that...lemme try again

Done :)
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top