Solve Bartlett's Formula: Example 2.4.2 | Get Expert Help

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nacho-man
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the computation of the (i,j) element of the covariance matrix W using Bartlett's formula, specifically in the context of Example 2.4.2. Participants seek clarification on the inputs and application of the formula, which involves infinite sums and properties of the function ρ.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in computing the (i,j) element of the covariance matrix W from the given formula and requests guidance.
  • Another participant notes a lack of a clear question in the initial post and asks for further clarification on what the original poster is trying to achieve.
  • The original poster clarifies that they are trying to understand how Example 2.4.2 was derived using formula 2.4.10, specifically regarding the inputs for the formula.
  • A later reply provides a detailed breakdown of formula 2.4.10, explaining how terms involving ρ can be simplified based on the condition that ρ(h)=0 for almost all h, leading to the conclusion that w_{ij}=0 unless i=j, in which case w_{ij}=1.
  • Another participant reiterates the explanation of how to derive the result from the formula, emphasizing the conditions under which terms in the sum become non-zero.
  • The original poster expresses satisfaction with the explanation, indicating that it clarified their confusion regarding the variables involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

While there is a clear explanation provided regarding the computation of w_{ij}, the initial confusion and request for clarification indicate that there was no consensus on the understanding of the formula prior to the detailed response. The discussion reflects a progression from uncertainty to clarity for the original poster, but does not imply a broader agreement among all participants.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on the specific properties of the function ρ and the assumptions made about its values, which are crucial for the simplification of the formula. The resolution of the computation relies on these assumptions being clearly understood.

nacho-man
Messages
166
Reaction score
0
Hi,
Just having some difficulty computing the example (i,j) element of the cov matrix W here from the given formula.

Could anyone provide some guidance?
I have attached the example question (example 2.4.2) and also the supporting equation previous from it.

Any assistance is greatly appreciated.

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • relevant.jpg
    relevant.jpg
    29.4 KB · Views: 102
  • example.jpg
    example.jpg
    22.7 KB · Views: 94
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi nacho,

I will start with I probably can't help you but am interested in this question as well. Last semester I took a course on Time Series and I think that's what you are doing as well. The theory can be difficult at times.

In your post though I don't see any actual problem to solve. I see the two formulas for an infinite sum to calculate $w_{ij}$ and some text in the second picture, but nothing that looks like a question. Can you explain a bit more please what you are trying to do?
 
Thanks for replying Jameson.

in particular, i am trying to find out how they did the example 2.4.2.

They worked out $w_{ij}$ using (2.4.10) but I am not entirely sure what the inputs for the formula are.
 
nacho said:
Hi,
Just having some difficulty computing the example (i,j) element of the cov matrix W here from the given formula.

Could anyone provide some guidance?
I have attached the example question (example 2.4.2) and also the supporting equation previous from it.

Any assistance is greatly appreciated.

Thanks!
I know nothing about Bartlett's formula, but I can tell you how to get 2.4.2 from 2.4.10. The formula 2.4.10 says $$w_{ij} = \sum_{k=-\infty}^\infty \{\rho(k+i) + \rho(k-i) -2\rho(i)\rho(k)\} \times \{\rho(k+j) + \rho(k-j) -2\rho(j)\rho(k)\}.$$ In Example 2.4.2 you are told that $\rho(h)=0$ for almost all values of $h$. In fact, the only value of $h$ for which $\rho(h)\ne0$ is $h=0$, and in that case $\rho(0) = 1$. All the terms on the right side of 2.4.10 involve values of $\rho$, so you can put them all equal to $0$ unless they might be equal to $\rho(0).$ So in the expression $\rho(k+i) + \rho(k-i) -2\rho(i)\rho(k)$, the terms $\rho(k+i)$ and $2\rho(i)\rho(k)$ will always be zero, and the only term that can survive is $\rho(k-i)$ (which will be nonzero when $k=i$). The same argument applies to the other expression in the formula 2.4.10, namely $\rho(k+j) + \rho(k-j) -2\rho(j)\rho(k)$, which reduces to $\rho(k-j).$ Thus 2.4.10 becomes $$w_{ij} = \sum_{k=-\infty}^\infty \rho(k-i)\rho(k-j).$$ In that infinite sum, all the terms will again be zero (because either $k-i$ or $k-j$ will be nonzero), unless $i=j$, in which case there is one nonzero term (when $k=j$). Therefore $w_{ij}=0$ unless $i=j$ in which case $w_{ij}=1.$
 
Opalg said:
I know nothing about Bartlett's formula, but I can tell you how to get 2.4.2 from 2.4.10. The formula 2.4.10 says $$w_{ij} = \sum_{k=-\infty}^\infty \{\rho(k+i) + \rho(k-i) -2\rho(i)\rho(k)\} \times \{\rho(k+j) + \rho(k-j) -2\rho(j)\rho(k)\}.$$ In Example 2.4.2 you are told that $\rho(h)=0$ for almost all values of $h$. In fact, the only value of $h$ for which $\rho(h)\ne0$ is $h=0$, and in that case $\rho(0) = 1$. All the terms on the right side of 2.4.10 involve values of $\rho$, so you can put them all equal to $0$ unless they might be equal to $\rho(0).$ So in the expression $\rho(k+i) + \rho(k-i) -2\rho(i)\rho(k)$, the terms $\rho(k+i)$ and $2\rho(i)\rho(k)$ will always be zero, and the only term that can survive is $\rho(k-i)$ (which will be nonzero when $k=i$). The same argument applies to the other expression in the formula 2.4.10, namely $\rho(k+j) + \rho(k-j) -2\rho(j)\rho(k)$, which reduces to $\rho(k-j).$ Thus 2.4.10 becomes $$w_{ij} = \sum_{k=-\infty}^\infty \rho(k-i)\rho(k-j).$$ In that infinite sum, all the terms will again be zero (because either $k-i$ or $k-j$ will be nonzero), unless $i=j$, in which case there is one nonzero term (when $k=j$). Therefore $w_{ij}=0$ unless $i=j$ in which case $w_{ij}=1.$
precisely what I needed, thank you! that makes complete sense, I just couldn't recognise that the k's, i's and j's were just referring to h
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K