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!

LS solution vs. pre-averaging

  1. Jan 22, 2013 #1
    Hi,

    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,
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 22, 2013 #2

    chiro

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Hey divB.

    Can you use the properties of a psuedo-inverse to show that this holds? (Recall that a pseudo-inverse has the property that C*C'*C = C)
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: LS solution vs. pre-averaging
  1. Is this a solution? (Replies: 4)

Loading...