Hi,(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

I have a system of equations [itex]\mathbf{y} = \mathbf{A}\mathbf{c}[/itex] where the entries in [itex]\mathbf{c}[/itex] are small (say, K=10 elements) and the number equations (i.e., elements in [itex]\mathbf{y}[/itex]) is huge (say, N=10000 elements).

I want to solve now for [itex]\mathbf{c}[/itex]; this can be done using LS with the Pseudo inverse:

[tex]\mathbf{c} = \mathbf{A}^{\dagger} \mathbf{y}[/tex]

However, the vector [itex]\mathbf{y}[/itex] is now heavily corrupted by noise (just assume iid Gaussian).

I could calculate the mean over M consecutive elements in [itex]\mathbf{y}[/itex] and rows in [itex]\mathbf{A}[/itex] in order to average over the noise. The system would be collapsed to a smaller system with N/M entries which would be solved via LS.

Now I ask the question: Is this better than directly using LS with the full system?

I doubt because that's the sense of LS. However, I was not able to "proof" this analytically.

Any help?

Thanks,

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# LS solution vs. pre-averaging

Loading...

Similar Threads - solution averaging | Date |
---|---|

I Finding the explicit solution of a trig equation | Nov 21, 2017 |

I Average chord length of a circle | Oct 24, 2017 |

A Find positive integer solutions to a/(b+c)+b/(a+c)+c/(a+b)=4 | Aug 6, 2017 |

B Integer solutions for equations | Jul 6, 2017 |

B Solution set of a square root | May 8, 2017 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**