This is a simple problem. Normaly I use two for-loops in GNU Octave to find the parameter a an

pouzdrotf 2022-07-06 Answered
This is a simple problem. Normaly I use two for-loops in GNU Octave to find the parameter a and b and K.
The cost function I'm going to minimize is:
V = i = 0 N ( | u i K u 0 a b t i | )
Where u i is a vector for measurement and t i is also a measured vector. u 0 is known so only a, b, K is unknow.
Is there any other way to minimize V instead of using three for-loops in GNU Octave?
In my case, two-variables can solve the problem too. The K is just a correction factor. Not necessary to 100%.
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Answers (1)

postojahob
Answered 2022-07-07 Author has 13 answers
Have you looked at fminsearch? It can minimize a cost function over several parameters (just put them together in one vector).

We have step-by-step solutions for your answer!

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

You might be interested in

asked 2022-06-21
Consider a random variable X with E ( X 2 ) < . How do I show that n P ( | X | > ε n ) 0 for each ε > 0? I don't even know where to start, and would like any hint.

As X L 2 , { X } is an absolutely continuous collection, wich means that there is an N N such that
| X | > N X d P < ε
Where can I go from there?
asked 2022-06-24
I`m having some trouble with how to prove that if μ is finite then it is sum-finite.
I know that if μ is finite on a measurable space (E,A) if μ < and that μ is sum-finite on a measurable space (E,A) if μ = n = 1 μ n , where μ n , for n N , is finite measures. But I dont know how to tie these definitions together.
asked 2022-04-12
Let ν be a signed measure and | ν | be its total variation. Then does ν  finite  | ν |  finite? If so, why?
I can almost see this by appealing to the Jordan decomposition of ν and the definition of | ν | ,
ν = ν + ν | ν | = ν + + ν
but I am not completely sure that there can't be a measurable set A such that ν ( A ) = 0 but ν + ( A ) = ν ( A ) = .
For instance, suppose our measurable space is ( R , B ( R ) ), where B ( R ) denotes the Borel subsets of R . Let ν + , ν map a set to the number of integers it contains. Then ν + , ν seem to be measures, and ν would seem to be a signed measure. And if so, the implication of interest fails.
asked 2022-04-02
Subjects were classified according to which of three groups they were assigned. Group A received lots of praise. Group B received moderate praise. Group C received no praise for correct answers to math problems. Following the manipulation, all subjects completed a posttest measure of mathematical ability. Higher scores indicate greater mathematical ability.
Does praise influence performance?
 Group A  Group B  Group C 743662541873354771
Identify the IV and the scale of measurement;
Identify the DV and the scale of measurement and for the IV – identify the number of levels;
Identify null and alternative hypotheses, are they directional or non-directional?
Assume that the distributions of the populations are approximately normal.
asked 2022-07-01
Let ( X , M , μ ) be a measueable space, and let f : R R be nonnegative f ( x ) 0 and measurable. Let E n = { x R : f ( x ) 1 n }. Show the following result
R f d m = lim n [ n , n ] f d m = lim n E n f d m .
I was thinking maybe we can assume f χ E n f, monotone increasing sequence of nonnegative measurable functions, and then apply monotone convergence theorem, but I am not sure that we can find such increasing sequence, as 1 n is decreasing.
asked 2022-06-04
So my task is the following: Consider a sequence of random variables ( X n ) n N with X n a . s . X and X n B a.s. for B R . Show that X n L p X for all p N .

My ideas till now:
1. In a first step i tried to show that the expected value is bounded by both sides from zero: 0 E ( | X n X | p ) 0 Problem here is that i would need that | X n | B a.s.
2. My second attempt was to use the dominated convergence theorem. With Y n = B it follows that if Y = B that Y n a . s . Y and E ( | Y n Y | ). Now I also need that | X n | Y and then it follows that E ( | X n X | ) n 0.

Probably someone can give me a hint or another way of solving this.
asked 2022-08-22
A tree is 57 inches tall. How tall is it in feet and inches?

New questions