Prev: xticklabel code versus xlabel
Next: .NET assembly missing from drop down menu
From: Alexander Petrov on 22 Jul 2010 12:17
Hello,

Application of Matlab fit function under 2d-matrix give me an quadratic function:
sf(x,y) = p00 + p10*x + p01*y + p20*x^2 + p11*x*y + p02*y^2

But what I want is an general equation of quadric surface, like on that webpage - http://mathworld.wolfram.com/QuadraticSurface.html

I've know, that this is a stupid question, but could I really rewrite matlab result as:

let z= sf(x,y);
p00 + p10*x + p01*y + p20*x^2 + p11*x*y + p02*y^2 - z = 0

Does such a "trick" give me an general equation of quadric surface ?

Thank you
From: Walter Roberson on 22 Jul 2010 12:34
Alexander Petrov wrote:

> Application of Matlab fit function under 2d-matrix give me an quadratic
> function: sf(x,y) = p00 + p10*x + p01*y + p20*x^2 + p11*x*y + p02*y^2
>
> But what I want is an general equation of quadric surface, like on that
> webpage - http://mathworld.wolfram.com/QuadraticSurface.html
>
> I've know, that this is a stupid question, but could I really rewrite
> matlab result as:
>
> let z= sf(x,y);
> p00 + p10*x + p01*y + p20*x^2 + p11*x*y + p02*y^2 - z = 0
>
> Does such a "trick" give me an general equation of quadric surface ?

No. If z = sf(x,y) and the overall surface is to remain quadradic, then
sf(x,y) would have to be a multinomial in x and y in which the "total power"
of each term did not exceed 2. Such a multinomial, when substituted into the
proposed expression, would be of identical form to the p00 <etc> expression
except with different coefficients. This would not be sufficient to express
the general quadratic surfaces as described on Wolfram's page, which require
polynomials in x, y, and z.
From: Alexander Petrov on 22 Jul 2010 16:14
"Roger Stafford" <ellieandrogerxyzzy(a)mindspring.com.invalid> wrote in message
> The answer is no. Try solving for z in the quadratic surface equation you referred to and you will get an expression involving x and y within square roots, which is incompatible with your sf(x, y).

Thank you for your answer. And if I understand you properly - to get the model in form of general equation of quadric surface from my data (fitting model form of general equation to data) I should or, as you told me, solving for z in the quadratic surface equation (that looks not very simple) or use another method of approximation (not use "fit" matlab function), that has explicitly notion about the form of model I needed ? Am I right ?

In fact after getting model in form of quadric surface (Quadratic form), I want to reduce it to canonical form - and all methods of reduction, that I found, work with general equation of quadric surface.

Thank you
From: Walter Roberson on 22 Jul 2010 17:58
Alexander Petrov wrote:
> "Roger Stafford" <ellieandrogerxyzzy(a)mindspring.com.invalid> wrote in
> message
>> The answer is no. Try solving for z in the quadratic surface
>> equation you referred to and you will get an expression involving x
>> and y within square roots, which is incompatible with your sf(x, y).
>
> Thank you for your answer. And if I understand you properly - to get the
> model in form of general equation of quadric surface from my data
> (fitting model form of general equation to data) I should or, as you
> told me, solving for z in the quadratic surface equation (that looks not
> very simple) or use another method of approximation (not use "fit"
> matlab function), that has explicitly notion about the form of model I
> needed ? Am I right ?
>
> In fact after getting model in form of quadric surface (Quadratic form),
> I want to reduce it to canonical form - and all methods of reduction,
> that I found, work with general equation of quadric surface.

I am having difficulty following what you are trying to do.

What do you have as input data?

What are you trying to do with the data?

Is the approach of finding the quadratic surface a particular method to reach
your ultimate goal, or do you specifically want to use this approach?


I tried going back to see if you had described your situation in some previous
posting, but it does not appear that you had posted before your initial
quadratic surface message.
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: xticklabel code versus xlabel
Next: .NET assembly missing from drop down menu