On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 09:39:30PM +0000, Italo Maia wrote:
>
> Hummm, so my assumption that my previous values for a, b and c were the best are wrong.
I calculated the resid and it is really smaller. Real thanks for that!
I wouldn't take the difference too seriously, given that the data are not
really close to the curve. The errors seem quite large.
> Any tips on calculating the rsquared?
No.
Gilles
>
> Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 22:05:26 +0200
> From: gilles@harfang.homelinux.org
> To: user@commons.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [math]
>
> Hi.
>
> If you are using the function
>
> a * Math.pow(t, b) * Math.exp(c * t)
>
> the gradient is:
>
> { Math.pow(t, b) * Math.exp(c * t),
> a * Math.log(t) * Math.pow(t, b) * Math.exp(c * t),
> a * t Math.pow(t, b) * Math.exp(c * t) }
>
> > // No idea what goes here. Nothing seems to work.
>
> Well, the gradient (partial derivatives w.r.t the parameters) is the thing
> that will work; the attached figure shows the data and the function that
> fits it with
> a = 1.097378664278161
> b = 0.4273818336149512
> c = 0.01457006142420487
>
> >
> > a, b and c for this example should be: A: 1.0782 B: 0.4583 C: 0.0166
>
> The fit is slightly better with the values found by "CurveFitter"
> (the "LevenbergMarquardt" algorithm actually).
>
> Regards,
> Gilles
>
>
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: userunsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: userhelp@commons.apache.org

To unsubscribe, email: userunsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, email: userhelp@commons.apache.org
