LSQ Notation: Unusual Notation Explained by Herget 1948

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter solarblast
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Notation
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
3 replies · 1K views
solarblast
Messages
146
Reaction score
2
See the two pages I've attached. 47 and 48. I'm trying to understand the notation used for the (129) equations. A hint is just below the equations. ( ) ∑. These pages are describing the LSQ method. (aa), etc. aa doesn't make sense to me. Herget devised this notation in 1948.

Comments
 

Attachments

  • LSQ-Pg47.jpg
    LSQ-Pg47.jpg
    39.5 KB · Views: 517
  • LSQ-Pg48.jpg
    LSQ-Pg48.jpg
    33 KB · Views: 511
Mathematics news on Phys.org
solarblast said:
See the two pages I've attached. 47 and 48. I'm trying to understand the notation used for the (129) equations. A hint is just below the equations. ( ) ∑. These pages are describing the LSQ method. (aa), etc. aa doesn't make sense to me. Herget devised this notation in 1948.

Comments
It's not very clear, but the stuff in (130) gives a better idea. For example, the notations (aa) x and (ab) y mean, respectively,
$$ x \sum_{i = 1}^n (a_i)^2$$
and
$$ y \sum_{i = 1}^n a_i b_i$$
 
The notation is unfamiliar to me but it's written in a more common form in Eq. 130. Just set all the weights to one in Eq. 130 to find Eq. 129 with explicit summations.
 
Sounds about right.