How do I fit a resonance curve? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)How to guess the correct fitting function to some data?Fitting of exponential data gives me a constant functionCurve Fitting and Multiple ExperimentsPower fit to some experimental dataShould a Gaussian Curve Always Be Drawn Symmetrically?Arrhenius Fit: Linear or exponential form?Reduced chi-squared value for noiseless spectraDamped Harmonic Curve fit and ForceConstant wind drag while falling?Removing zero-counts in exponential decay measurement
How are presidential pardons supposed to be used?
What are the performance impacts of 'functional' Rust?
Problem when applying foreach loop
Is there folklore associating late breastfeeding with low intelligence and/or gullibility?
The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551
How can players take actions together that are impossible otherwise?
Can a zero nonce be safely used with AES-GCM if the key is random and never used again?
Did the new image of black hole confirm the general theory of relativity?
Stars Make Stars
Blender game recording at the wrong time
Statistical model of ligand substitution
What would be Julian Assange's expected punishment, on the current English criminal law?
Strange behaviour of Check
What to do with post with dry rot?
How do I keep my slimes from escaping their pens?
Losing the Initialization Vector in Cipher Block Chaining
Windows 10: How to Lock (not sleep) laptop on lid close?
How do you clear the ApexPages.getMessages() collection in a test?
New Order #5: where Fibonacci and Beatty meet at Wythoff
Do we know why communications with Beresheet and NASA were lost during the attempted landing of the Moon lander?
I'm thinking of a number
Cold is to Refrigerator as warm is to?
What did Darwin mean by 'squib' here?
Was credit for the black hole image misattributed?
How do I fit a resonance curve?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)How to guess the correct fitting function to some data?Fitting of exponential data gives me a constant functionCurve Fitting and Multiple ExperimentsPower fit to some experimental dataShould a Gaussian Curve Always Be Drawn Symmetrically?Arrhenius Fit: Linear or exponential form?Reduced chi-squared value for noiseless spectraDamped Harmonic Curve fit and ForceConstant wind drag while falling?Removing zero-counts in exponential decay measurement
$begingroup$
In an experiment, I collected data points $ (ω,υ(ω))$ that are modeled by the equation:
$$ υ(ω)=fracωCsqrt(ω^2-ω_0^2)^2+γ^2ω^2 ,.$$
How can do I fit the data to the above correlation? And how can I extract $γ$ through this process?
experimental-physics correlation-functions data-analysis
edited Apr 1 at 9:31
knzhou
47k11127226
asked Mar 31 at 19:47
Andreas MastronikolisAndreas Mastronikolis
916
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In an experiment, I collected data points $ (ω,υ(ω))$ that are modeled by the equation:
$$ υ(ω)=fracωCsqrt(ω^2-ω_0^2)^2+γ^2ω^2 ,.$$
How can do I fit the data to the above correlation? And how can I extract $γ$ through this process?
experimental-physics correlation-functions data-analysis
edited Apr 1 at 9:31
knzhou
47k11127226
asked Mar 31 at 19:47
Andreas MastronikolisAndreas Mastronikolis
916
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:24
$begingroup$
$C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:28
$begingroup$
You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:56
3
$begingroup$
I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Apr 1 at 11:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In an experiment, I collected data points $ (ω,υ(ω))$ that are modeled by the equation:
$$ υ(ω)=fracωCsqrt(ω^2-ω_0^2)^2+γ^2ω^2 ,.$$
How can do I fit the data to the above correlation? And how can I extract $γ$ through this process?
experimental-physics correlation-functions data-analysis
edited Apr 1 at 9:31
knzhou
47k11127226
asked Mar 31 at 19:47
Andreas MastronikolisAndreas Mastronikolis
916
$endgroup$
In an experiment, I collected data points $ (ω,υ(ω))$ that are modeled by the equation:
$$ υ(ω)=fracωCsqrt(ω^2-ω_0^2)^2+γ^2ω^2 ,.$$
How can do I fit the data to the above correlation? And how can I extract $γ$ through this process?
experimental-physics correlation-functions data-analysis
experimental-physics correlation-functions data-analysis
edited Apr 1 at 9:31
knzhou
47k11127226
asked Mar 31 at 19:47
Andreas MastronikolisAndreas Mastronikolis
916
edited Apr 1 at 9:31
knzhou
47k11127226
asked Mar 31 at 19:47
Andreas MastronikolisAndreas Mastronikolis
916
edited Apr 1 at 9:31
knzhou
47k11127226
edited Apr 1 at 9:31
knzhou
47k11127226
edited Apr 1 at 9:31
knzhou
47k11127226
47k11127226
asked Mar 31 at 19:47
Andreas MastronikolisAndreas Mastronikolis
916
asked Mar 31 at 19:47
Andreas MastronikolisAndreas Mastronikolis
916
asked Mar 31 at 19:47
Andreas MastronikolisAndreas Mastronikolis
916
916
$begingroup$
almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:24
$begingroup$
$C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:28
$begingroup$
You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:56
3
$begingroup$
I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Apr 1 at 11:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:24
$begingroup$
$C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:28
$begingroup$
You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:56
3
$begingroup$
I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Apr 1 at 11:35
$begingroup$
almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:24
$begingroup$
almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:24
$begingroup$
$C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:28
$begingroup$
$C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:28
$begingroup$
You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:56
$begingroup$
You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:56
3
3
$begingroup$
I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Apr 1 at 11:35
$begingroup$
I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Apr 1 at 11:35
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
What you want to find is the parameters $theta=(C, omega_0, gamma)$ that minimizes the difference between $nu(omega|theta)$ (the curve given the parameters) and the measured $nu_i$ values.
The most popular method is least mean square fitting, which minimizes the sum of the squares of the differences. One can also do it by formulating the normal equations and solve it as a (potentially big) linear equation system. Another approach is the Gauss-Newton algorithm, a simple iterative method to do it. It is a good exercise to implement the solution oneself, but once you have done it once or twice it is best to rely on some software package.
Note that this kind of fitting works well when you know the functional form (your equation for $nu(omega)$), since you can ensure only that the parameters that matter are included. If you try to fit some general polynomial or function you can get overfitting (some complex curve that fits all the data but has nothing to do with your problem) besides the problem of identifying the parameters you care about.
answered Mar 31 at 20:28
Anders SandbergAnders Sandberg
10.3k21530
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Don't try using any general-purpose curve fitting algorithm for this.
The form of your function looks like a frequency response function, with the two unknown parameters $omega_0$ and $gamma$ - i.e. the resonant frequency, and the damping parameter. The function you specified omits an important feature if this is measured data, namely the relative phase between the "force" driving the oscillation and the response.
If you didn't measure the phase at each frequency, repeat the experiment, because that is critical information.
When you have the amplitude and phase data, there are curve fitting techniques devised specifically for this problem of "system identification" in experimental modal analysis. A simple one is the so-called "circle fitting" method. If you make a Nyquist plot of your measured data (i.e. plot imaginary part of the response against the real part), the section of the curve near the resonance is a circle, and you can fit a circle to the measured data and find the parameters from it.
In practice, a simplistic approach assuming the system only has one resonance often doesn't work well, because the response of a real system near resonance also includes the off-resonance response to all the other vibration modes. If the resonant frequencies are well separated and lightly damped, it is possible to correct for this while fitting "one mode at a time". If this is not the case, you need methods that can identify several resonances simultaneously from one response function.
Rather than re-invent the wheel, use existing code. The signal processing toolbox in MATLAB would be a good starting point - for example https://uk.mathworks.com/help/signal/ref/modalfit.html
answered Mar 31 at 20:58
alephzeroalephzero
5,66521120
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
$endgroup$
– Emilio Pisanty
Mar 31 at 22:14
$begingroup$
what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
$endgroup$
– IamAStudent
Mar 31 at 22:56
2
$begingroup$
What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:40
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If we put:
$$Y = fracomega^2u(omega)^2$$
and
$$X = omega^2$$
the equation becomes:
$$Y =fracX^2C^2 +frac(gamma^2 - 2 omega_0^2)C^2 X + fracomega_0^4C^2$$
You can then extract the coefficients using polynomial fitting. To get the least-squares fit right, you have to compute the errors in $Y$ and $X$ for each data point from the measurement errors in $omega$ and $u(omega)$.
answered Apr 1 at 0:07
Count IblisCount Iblis
8,48411439
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:43
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Are you looking for something like polynomial regression? The general idea is, if you have measured pairs of (x, y(x)) and you are looking for find a fit of the form:
$$y = alpha_0 + alpha_1 x + alpha_2 x^2 ...$$
You can write this in matrix form as:
$$beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ y_3 \ vdots \ y_n endbmatrix = beginbmatrix 1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_3 & x_3^2 & cdots \ vdots & vdots & vdots & vdots \ 1 & x_n &x_n^2 & cdots endbmatrix beginbmatrix alpha_0 \ alpha_1 \ alpha_2 \ vdots \ alpha_m endbmatrix$$
This can now be solved for your coefficients, $alpha_i$. That being said, and as was hinted at in your comments, I've never actually done this, and have instead used non-linear fitting functions provided by libraries.
More information on polynomial regression on the wikipedia page.
Edit: As you say in the comments, this method is only applicable if you can write your function that you wish to fit in polynomial form, which I don't think you can do for your example. In which case you are best off referring to the other answers to this question.
answered Mar 31 at 20:24
Anon1759Anon1759
513
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
$endgroup$
– Andreas Mastronikolis
Mar 31 at 20:28
$begingroup$
Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
$endgroup$
– Anon1759
Mar 31 at 20:32
$begingroup$
The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:04
$begingroup$
@AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:06
$begingroup$
@VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:37
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f469754%2fhow-do-i-fit-a-resonance-curve%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
What you want to find is the parameters $theta=(C, omega_0, gamma)$ that minimizes the difference between $nu(omega|theta)$ (the curve given the parameters) and the measured $nu_i$ values.
The most popular method is least mean square fitting, which minimizes the sum of the squares of the differences. One can also do it by formulating the normal equations and solve it as a (potentially big) linear equation system. Another approach is the Gauss-Newton algorithm, a simple iterative method to do it. It is a good exercise to implement the solution oneself, but once you have done it once or twice it is best to rely on some software package.
Note that this kind of fitting works well when you know the functional form (your equation for $nu(omega)$), since you can ensure only that the parameters that matter are included. If you try to fit some general polynomial or function you can get overfitting (some complex curve that fits all the data but has nothing to do with your problem) besides the problem of identifying the parameters you care about.
answered Mar 31 at 20:28
Anders SandbergAnders Sandberg
10.3k21530
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What you want to find is the parameters $theta=(C, omega_0, gamma)$ that minimizes the difference between $nu(omega|theta)$ (the curve given the parameters) and the measured $nu_i$ values.
The most popular method is least mean square fitting, which minimizes the sum of the squares of the differences. One can also do it by formulating the normal equations and solve it as a (potentially big) linear equation system. Another approach is the Gauss-Newton algorithm, a simple iterative method to do it. It is a good exercise to implement the solution oneself, but once you have done it once or twice it is best to rely on some software package.
Note that this kind of fitting works well when you know the functional form (your equation for $nu(omega)$), since you can ensure only that the parameters that matter are included. If you try to fit some general polynomial or function you can get overfitting (some complex curve that fits all the data but has nothing to do with your problem) besides the problem of identifying the parameters you care about.
answered Mar 31 at 20:28
Anders SandbergAnders Sandberg
10.3k21530
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What you want to find is the parameters $theta=(C, omega_0, gamma)$ that minimizes the difference between $nu(omega|theta)$ (the curve given the parameters) and the measured $nu_i$ values.
The most popular method is least mean square fitting, which minimizes the sum of the squares of the differences. One can also do it by formulating the normal equations and solve it as a (potentially big) linear equation system. Another approach is the Gauss-Newton algorithm, a simple iterative method to do it. It is a good exercise to implement the solution oneself, but once you have done it once or twice it is best to rely on some software package.
Note that this kind of fitting works well when you know the functional form (your equation for $nu(omega)$), since you can ensure only that the parameters that matter are included. If you try to fit some general polynomial or function you can get overfitting (some complex curve that fits all the data but has nothing to do with your problem) besides the problem of identifying the parameters you care about.
answered Mar 31 at 20:28
Anders SandbergAnders Sandberg
10.3k21530
$endgroup$
What you want to find is the parameters $theta=(C, omega_0, gamma)$ that minimizes the difference between $nu(omega|theta)$ (the curve given the parameters) and the measured $nu_i$ values.
The most popular method is least mean square fitting, which minimizes the sum of the squares of the differences. One can also do it by formulating the normal equations and solve it as a (potentially big) linear equation system. Another approach is the Gauss-Newton algorithm, a simple iterative method to do it. It is a good exercise to implement the solution oneself, but once you have done it once or twice it is best to rely on some software package.
Note that this kind of fitting works well when you know the functional form (your equation for $nu(omega)$), since you can ensure only that the parameters that matter are included. If you try to fit some general polynomial or function you can get overfitting (some complex curve that fits all the data but has nothing to do with your problem) besides the problem of identifying the parameters you care about.
answered Mar 31 at 20:28
Anders SandbergAnders Sandberg
10.3k21530
answered Mar 31 at 20:28
Anders SandbergAnders Sandberg
10.3k21530
answered Mar 31 at 20:28
Anders SandbergAnders Sandberg
10.3k21530
answered Mar 31 at 20:28
Anders SandbergAnders Sandberg
10.3k21530
10.3k21530
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Don't try using any general-purpose curve fitting algorithm for this.
The form of your function looks like a frequency response function, with the two unknown parameters $omega_0$ and $gamma$ - i.e. the resonant frequency, and the damping parameter. The function you specified omits an important feature if this is measured data, namely the relative phase between the "force" driving the oscillation and the response.
If you didn't measure the phase at each frequency, repeat the experiment, because that is critical information.
When you have the amplitude and phase data, there are curve fitting techniques devised specifically for this problem of "system identification" in experimental modal analysis. A simple one is the so-called "circle fitting" method. If you make a Nyquist plot of your measured data (i.e. plot imaginary part of the response against the real part), the section of the curve near the resonance is a circle, and you can fit a circle to the measured data and find the parameters from it.
In practice, a simplistic approach assuming the system only has one resonance often doesn't work well, because the response of a real system near resonance also includes the off-resonance response to all the other vibration modes. If the resonant frequencies are well separated and lightly damped, it is possible to correct for this while fitting "one mode at a time". If this is not the case, you need methods that can identify several resonances simultaneously from one response function.
Rather than re-invent the wheel, use existing code. The signal processing toolbox in MATLAB would be a good starting point - for example https://uk.mathworks.com/help/signal/ref/modalfit.html
answered Mar 31 at 20:58
alephzeroalephzero
5,66521120
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
$endgroup$
– Emilio Pisanty
Mar 31 at 22:14
$begingroup$
what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
$endgroup$
– IamAStudent
Mar 31 at 22:56
2
$begingroup$
What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:40
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Don't try using any general-purpose curve fitting algorithm for this.
The form of your function looks like a frequency response function, with the two unknown parameters $omega_0$ and $gamma$ - i.e. the resonant frequency, and the damping parameter. The function you specified omits an important feature if this is measured data, namely the relative phase between the "force" driving the oscillation and the response.
If you didn't measure the phase at each frequency, repeat the experiment, because that is critical information.
When you have the amplitude and phase data, there are curve fitting techniques devised specifically for this problem of "system identification" in experimental modal analysis. A simple one is the so-called "circle fitting" method. If you make a Nyquist plot of your measured data (i.e. plot imaginary part of the response against the real part), the section of the curve near the resonance is a circle, and you can fit a circle to the measured data and find the parameters from it.
In practice, a simplistic approach assuming the system only has one resonance often doesn't work well, because the response of a real system near resonance also includes the off-resonance response to all the other vibration modes. If the resonant frequencies are well separated and lightly damped, it is possible to correct for this while fitting "one mode at a time". If this is not the case, you need methods that can identify several resonances simultaneously from one response function.
Rather than re-invent the wheel, use existing code. The signal processing toolbox in MATLAB would be a good starting point - for example https://uk.mathworks.com/help/signal/ref/modalfit.html
answered Mar 31 at 20:58
alephzeroalephzero
5,66521120
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
$endgroup$
– Emilio Pisanty
Mar 31 at 22:14
$begingroup$
what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
$endgroup$
– IamAStudent
Mar 31 at 22:56
2
$begingroup$
What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:40
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Don't try using any general-purpose curve fitting algorithm for this.
The form of your function looks like a frequency response function, with the two unknown parameters $omega_0$ and $gamma$ - i.e. the resonant frequency, and the damping parameter. The function you specified omits an important feature if this is measured data, namely the relative phase between the "force" driving the oscillation and the response.
If you didn't measure the phase at each frequency, repeat the experiment, because that is critical information.
When you have the amplitude and phase data, there are curve fitting techniques devised specifically for this problem of "system identification" in experimental modal analysis. A simple one is the so-called "circle fitting" method. If you make a Nyquist plot of your measured data (i.e. plot imaginary part of the response against the real part), the section of the curve near the resonance is a circle, and you can fit a circle to the measured data and find the parameters from it.
In practice, a simplistic approach assuming the system only has one resonance often doesn't work well, because the response of a real system near resonance also includes the off-resonance response to all the other vibration modes. If the resonant frequencies are well separated and lightly damped, it is possible to correct for this while fitting "one mode at a time". If this is not the case, you need methods that can identify several resonances simultaneously from one response function.
Rather than re-invent the wheel, use existing code. The signal processing toolbox in MATLAB would be a good starting point - for example https://uk.mathworks.com/help/signal/ref/modalfit.html
answered Mar 31 at 20:58
alephzeroalephzero
5,66521120
$endgroup$
Don't try using any general-purpose curve fitting algorithm for this.
The form of your function looks like a frequency response function, with the two unknown parameters $omega_0$ and $gamma$ - i.e. the resonant frequency, and the damping parameter. The function you specified omits an important feature if this is measured data, namely the relative phase between the "force" driving the oscillation and the response.
If you didn't measure the phase at each frequency, repeat the experiment, because that is critical information.
When you have the amplitude and phase data, there are curve fitting techniques devised specifically for this problem of "system identification" in experimental modal analysis. A simple one is the so-called "circle fitting" method. If you make a Nyquist plot of your measured data (i.e. plot imaginary part of the response against the real part), the section of the curve near the resonance is a circle, and you can fit a circle to the measured data and find the parameters from it.
In practice, a simplistic approach assuming the system only has one resonance often doesn't work well, because the response of a real system near resonance also includes the off-resonance response to all the other vibration modes. If the resonant frequencies are well separated and lightly damped, it is possible to correct for this while fitting "one mode at a time". If this is not the case, you need methods that can identify several resonances simultaneously from one response function.
Rather than re-invent the wheel, use existing code. The signal processing toolbox in MATLAB would be a good starting point - for example https://uk.mathworks.com/help/signal/ref/modalfit.html
answered Mar 31 at 20:58
alephzeroalephzero
5,66521120
edited Mar 31 at 21:03
answered Mar 31 at 20:58
alephzeroalephzero
5,66521120
answered Mar 31 at 20:58
alephzeroalephzero
5,66521120
answered Mar 31 at 20:58
alephzeroalephzero
5,66521120
5,66521120
7
$begingroup$
That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
$endgroup$
– Emilio Pisanty
Mar 31 at 22:14
$begingroup$
what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
$endgroup$
– IamAStudent
Mar 31 at 22:56
2
$begingroup$
What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:40
add a comment |
7
$begingroup$
That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
$endgroup$
– Emilio Pisanty
Mar 31 at 22:14
$begingroup$
what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
$endgroup$
– IamAStudent
Mar 31 at 22:56
2
$begingroup$
What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:40
7
7
$begingroup$
That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
$endgroup$
– Emilio Pisanty
Mar 31 at 22:14
$begingroup$
That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
$endgroup$
– Emilio Pisanty
Mar 31 at 22:14
$begingroup$
what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
$endgroup$
– IamAStudent
Mar 31 at 22:56
$begingroup$
what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
$endgroup$
– IamAStudent
Mar 31 at 22:56
2
2
$begingroup$
What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:40
$begingroup$
What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:40
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If we put:
$$Y = fracomega^2u(omega)^2$$
and
$$X = omega^2$$
the equation becomes:
$$Y =fracX^2C^2 +frac(gamma^2 - 2 omega_0^2)C^2 X + fracomega_0^4C^2$$
You can then extract the coefficients using polynomial fitting. To get the least-squares fit right, you have to compute the errors in $Y$ and $X$ for each data point from the measurement errors in $omega$ and $u(omega)$.
answered Apr 1 at 0:07
Count IblisCount Iblis
8,48411439
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:43
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If we put:
$$Y = fracomega^2u(omega)^2$$
and
$$X = omega^2$$
the equation becomes:
$$Y =fracX^2C^2 +frac(gamma^2 - 2 omega_0^2)C^2 X + fracomega_0^4C^2$$
You can then extract the coefficients using polynomial fitting. To get the least-squares fit right, you have to compute the errors in $Y$ and $X$ for each data point from the measurement errors in $omega$ and $u(omega)$.
answered Apr 1 at 0:07
Count IblisCount Iblis
8,48411439
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:43
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If we put:
$$Y = fracomega^2u(omega)^2$$
and
$$X = omega^2$$
the equation becomes:
$$Y =fracX^2C^2 +frac(gamma^2 - 2 omega_0^2)C^2 X + fracomega_0^4C^2$$
You can then extract the coefficients using polynomial fitting. To get the least-squares fit right, you have to compute the errors in $Y$ and $X$ for each data point from the measurement errors in $omega$ and $u(omega)$.
answered Apr 1 at 0:07
Count IblisCount Iblis
8,48411439
$endgroup$
If we put:
$$Y = fracomega^2u(omega)^2$$
and
$$X = omega^2$$
the equation becomes:
$$Y =fracX^2C^2 +frac(gamma^2 - 2 omega_0^2)C^2 X + fracomega_0^4C^2$$
You can then extract the coefficients using polynomial fitting. To get the least-squares fit right, you have to compute the errors in $Y$ and $X$ for each data point from the measurement errors in $omega$ and $u(omega)$.
answered Apr 1 at 0:07
Count IblisCount Iblis
8,48411439
answered Apr 1 at 0:07
Count IblisCount Iblis
8,48411439
answered Apr 1 at 0:07
Count IblisCount Iblis
8,48411439
answered Apr 1 at 0:07
Count IblisCount Iblis
8,48411439
8,48411439
4
$begingroup$
This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:43
add a comment |
4
$begingroup$
This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:43
4
4
$begingroup$
This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:43
$begingroup$
This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:43
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Are you looking for something like polynomial regression? The general idea is, if you have measured pairs of (x, y(x)) and you are looking for find a fit of the form:
$$y = alpha_0 + alpha_1 x + alpha_2 x^2 ...$$
You can write this in matrix form as:
$$beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ y_3 \ vdots \ y_n endbmatrix = beginbmatrix 1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_3 & x_3^2 & cdots \ vdots & vdots & vdots & vdots \ 1 & x_n &x_n^2 & cdots endbmatrix beginbmatrix alpha_0 \ alpha_1 \ alpha_2 \ vdots \ alpha_m endbmatrix$$
This can now be solved for your coefficients, $alpha_i$. That being said, and as was hinted at in your comments, I've never actually done this, and have instead used non-linear fitting functions provided by libraries.
More information on polynomial regression on the wikipedia page.
Edit: As you say in the comments, this method is only applicable if you can write your function that you wish to fit in polynomial form, which I don't think you can do for your example. In which case you are best off referring to the other answers to this question.
answered Mar 31 at 20:24
Anon1759Anon1759
513
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
$endgroup$
– Andreas Mastronikolis
Mar 31 at 20:28
$begingroup$
Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
$endgroup$
– Anon1759
Mar 31 at 20:32
$begingroup$
The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:04
$begingroup$
@AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:06
$begingroup$
@VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:37
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Are you looking for something like polynomial regression? The general idea is, if you have measured pairs of (x, y(x)) and you are looking for find a fit of the form:
$$y = alpha_0 + alpha_1 x + alpha_2 x^2 ...$$
You can write this in matrix form as:
$$beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ y_3 \ vdots \ y_n endbmatrix = beginbmatrix 1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_3 & x_3^2 & cdots \ vdots & vdots & vdots & vdots \ 1 & x_n &x_n^2 & cdots endbmatrix beginbmatrix alpha_0 \ alpha_1 \ alpha_2 \ vdots \ alpha_m endbmatrix$$
This can now be solved for your coefficients, $alpha_i$. That being said, and as was hinted at in your comments, I've never actually done this, and have instead used non-linear fitting functions provided by libraries.
More information on polynomial regression on the wikipedia page.
Edit: As you say in the comments, this method is only applicable if you can write your function that you wish to fit in polynomial form, which I don't think you can do for your example. In which case you are best off referring to the other answers to this question.
answered Mar 31 at 20:24
Anon1759Anon1759
513
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
$endgroup$
– Andreas Mastronikolis
Mar 31 at 20:28
$begingroup$
Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
$endgroup$
– Anon1759
Mar 31 at 20:32
$begingroup$
The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:04
$begingroup$
@AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:06
$begingroup$
@VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:37
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Are you looking for something like polynomial regression? The general idea is, if you have measured pairs of (x, y(x)) and you are looking for find a fit of the form:
$$y = alpha_0 + alpha_1 x + alpha_2 x^2 ...$$
You can write this in matrix form as:
$$beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ y_3 \ vdots \ y_n endbmatrix = beginbmatrix 1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_3 & x_3^2 & cdots \ vdots & vdots & vdots & vdots \ 1 & x_n &x_n^2 & cdots endbmatrix beginbmatrix alpha_0 \ alpha_1 \ alpha_2 \ vdots \ alpha_m endbmatrix$$
This can now be solved for your coefficients, $alpha_i$. That being said, and as was hinted at in your comments, I've never actually done this, and have instead used non-linear fitting functions provided by libraries.
More information on polynomial regression on the wikipedia page.
Edit: As you say in the comments, this method is only applicable if you can write your function that you wish to fit in polynomial form, which I don't think you can do for your example. In which case you are best off referring to the other answers to this question.
answered Mar 31 at 20:24
Anon1759Anon1759
513
$endgroup$
Are you looking for something like polynomial regression? The general idea is, if you have measured pairs of (x, y(x)) and you are looking for find a fit of the form:
$$y = alpha_0 + alpha_1 x + alpha_2 x^2 ...$$
You can write this in matrix form as:
$$beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ y_3 \ vdots \ y_n endbmatrix = beginbmatrix 1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_3 & x_3^2 & cdots \ vdots & vdots & vdots & vdots \ 1 & x_n &x_n^2 & cdots endbmatrix beginbmatrix alpha_0 \ alpha_1 \ alpha_2 \ vdots \ alpha_m endbmatrix$$
This can now be solved for your coefficients, $alpha_i$. That being said, and as was hinted at in your comments, I've never actually done this, and have instead used non-linear fitting functions provided by libraries.
More information on polynomial regression on the wikipedia page.
Edit: As you say in the comments, this method is only applicable if you can write your function that you wish to fit in polynomial form, which I don't think you can do for your example. In which case you are best off referring to the other answers to this question.
answered Mar 31 at 20:24
Anon1759Anon1759
513
edited Apr 1 at 6:52
answered Mar 31 at 20:24
Anon1759Anon1759
513
answered Mar 31 at 20:24
Anon1759Anon1759
513
answered Mar 31 at 20:24
Anon1759Anon1759
513
513
2
$begingroup$
The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
$endgroup$
– Andreas Mastronikolis
Mar 31 at 20:28
$begingroup$
Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
$endgroup$
– Anon1759
Mar 31 at 20:32
$begingroup$
The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:04
$begingroup$
@AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:06
$begingroup$
@VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:37
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
$endgroup$
– Andreas Mastronikolis
Mar 31 at 20:28
$begingroup$
Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
$endgroup$
– Anon1759
Mar 31 at 20:32
$begingroup$
The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:04
$begingroup$
@AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:06
$begingroup$
@VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:37
2
2
$begingroup$
The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
$endgroup$
– Andreas Mastronikolis
Mar 31 at 20:28
$begingroup$
The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
$endgroup$
– Andreas Mastronikolis
Mar 31 at 20:28
$begingroup$
Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
$endgroup$
– Anon1759
Mar 31 at 20:32
$begingroup$
Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
$endgroup$
– Anon1759
Mar 31 at 20:32
$begingroup$
The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:04
$begingroup$
The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:04
$begingroup$
@AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:06
$begingroup$
@AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir F
Apr 1 at 13:06
$begingroup$
@VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:37
$begingroup$
@VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
$endgroup$
– Federico Poloni
Apr 1 at 13:37
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f469754%2fhow-do-i-fit-a-resonance-curve%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:24
$begingroup$
$C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
Apr 1 at 7:28
$begingroup$
You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
Apr 1 at 10:56
3
$begingroup$
I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
Apr 1 at 11:35