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

  • Thread starter Thread starter nacho-man
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula
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: 90
  • example.jpg
    example.jpg
    22.7 KB · Views: 85
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
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
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...
Back
Top