Optimal discretization and expansion order of arbitrary data

laxsu19
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
Hi all,

I am trying to figure out 1) What to call my problem so I can better research the literature, and 2) see if anyone here knows of a solution.

Essentially, I have a large set of f(x) vs x points (~20,000) which I need to split into subdomains in x, and within each subdomain calculate a functional expansion of f(x). I want to do this in an optimal manner such that 1) the number of subdomains is minimized - or at least manageable, and 2) the number of expansion orders (probably Legendre) within each subdomain is also minimized.

Does anyone have any idea what 'field' of math this could be considered, and where to begin searching around? Unfortunately, this is just a minor step in what I have to do so I don't want to expend much effort here.

Thanks for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Does your data contain "noise" or is the data simply known values of some precisely defined function? If your data is known values of a precisely defined function, then the general topic to research is "function approximation". For many functions, the simplest approximations (for a given mean square error) are done by using ratios of polynomials. That topic is "approximation by rational functions".
 
If you can fit each subdomain by a low order polynomial, some buzzwords are automatic knot placement for spline curve fitting. (The "knots" are the points at the end of each subdomain, i.e. the end of each spline segment).
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
964
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top