Restricted (Natural) cubic spline - wrong equation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter shockedMonkey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cubic Natural
shockedMonkey
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
My Restricted (Natural) Cubic Spline Equation is Wrong ?

I am trying to fit a restricted cubic spline (natural cubic spline) to toy data, attempting to follow
Hastie, Tibshirani, Friedman 2nd ed. 5.2.1 p.144-146, Eqs 5.4 and 5.5.
Data: Is basically a transposed ‘S’ shape. R-code is:
n <© 100
x <- (1:n)/n
true <- ((exp(1.2*x)+1.5*sin(7*x))-1)/3
noise <- rnorm(n, 0, 0.15)
y <- true + noise
plot(x,y)

I set knots at: {.2, .4, .6, .8} and am fitting using the non-linear NLS() function in R, but I can’t get the S-shape of the data no matter what I try.

My equations is wrong ? Or I am completely off-base in my approach? Any suggestions?
(Book-excerpt, my equation, and data-plot posted below)
 

Attachments

  • book1.JPG
    book1.JPG
    16 KB · Views: 485
  • book2.JPG
    book2.JPG
    8.2 KB · Views: 504
  • splineEq.JPG
    splineEq.JPG
    8.7 KB · Views: 512
  • data.JPG
    data.JPG
    17.3 KB · Views: 462
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Q: Is my problem unclear? Or - is anyone aware of a better forum for my question? Thank you.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top