How can we find the coefficients?

  • MHB
  • Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Coefficients
In summary: Looks there is an assumption in there that the eigenvectors are orthonormal.Yes, that is an assumption. (Nod)Yes, that is an assumption. (Nod)
  • #1
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
5,049
7
Hey! :eek:

We have the initial value problem $$u'(t)=Au(t) \ \ , \ \ 0 \leq t \leq T \\ u(0)=u^0 \\ u \in \mathbb{R}^m$$ A is a $m \times m$ matrix

The eigenvalues of $A$ are $\lambda_j$ and the corresponding eigenvectors are $\phi^{(j)}$.

The general solution of initial value problem is $$u(t)=\sum_{j=1}^m c_j e^{\lambda_jt}\phi^{(j)}$$

right??

For $t=0$ we have $$u^0=\sum_{j=1}^m c_j \phi^{(j)}$$ How can we solve for $c_j$ ?? (Wondering)

Do we maybe have to use a dot product?? (Wondering)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
mathmari said:
Hey! :eek:

We have the initial value problem $$u'(t)=Au(t) \ \ , \ \ 0 \leq t \leq T \\ u(0)=u^0 \\ u \in \mathbb{R}^m$$ A is a $m \times m$ matrix

The eigenvalues of $A$ are $\lambda_j$ and the corresponding eigenvectors are $\phi^{(j)}$.

The general solution of initial value problem is $$u(t)=\sum_{j=1}^m c_j e^{\lambda_jt}\phi^{(j)}$$

right??

For $t=0$ we have $$u^0=\sum_{j=1}^m c_j \phi^{(j)}$$ How can we solve for $c_j$ ?? (Wondering)

Do we maybe have to use a dot product?? (Wondering)

Hi! (Wave)

Let's make that:
$$u^0=\sum_{j=1}^m c_j \phi^{(j)} = \Big(\phi^{(j)}\Big) \begin{bmatrix}c_1\\c_2\\\vdots\\c_n\end{bmatrix}$$
See how we can solve it for $c_j$? (Wondering)
 
Last edited:
  • #3
I like Serena said:
Let's make that:
$$u^0=\sum_{j=1}^m c_j \phi^{(j)}(0) = \Big(\phi^{(j)}(0)\Big) \begin{bmatrix}c_1\\c_2\\\vdots\\c_n\end{bmatrix}$$
See how we can solve it for $c_j$? (Wondering)

Are the eigenvectors $\phi^{(j)}$ a function of $t$?? (Wondering) Because you write $\phi^{(j)}(0)$.

$\Big (\phi^{(j)}(0)\Big )$ is a matrix, isn't it?? (Wondering) So, we have to find the inverse, or not??
 
  • #4
mathmari said:
Are the eigenvectors $\phi^{(j)}$ a function of $t$?? (Wondering) Because you write $\phi^{(j)}(0)$.

No I didn't! (Blush)

$\phi^{(j)}$ is a matrix, isn't it?? (Wondering) So, we have to find the inverse, or not??

Yep. (Nod)
 
  • #5
I like Serena said:
Yep. (Nod)

So, $$u^0\Big (\phi^{(j)}\Big )^{-1}=\begin{bmatrix}
c_1\\
c_2\\
\cdot\\
\cdot\\
\cdot \\
c_m
\end{bmatrix}$$ Is this correct?? (Wondering)

Now we have the vector $\begin{bmatrix}
c_1\\
c_2\\
\cdot\\
\cdot\\
\cdot \\
c_m
\end{bmatrix}$. How can we write the formula for $c_j$ ?? (Wondering)

I found in my book the following solution $$u(t)=\sum_{j=1}^m e^{\lambda t}(u(0), \phi^{(j)})\phi^{(j)}$$ where $(\cdot , \cdot)$ is the euclidean dot product.
But how did we find that?? (Wondering)
 
  • #6
mathmari said:
So, $$u^0\Big (\phi^{(j)}\Big )^{-1}=\begin{bmatrix}
c_1\\
c_2\\
\cdot\\
\cdot\\
\cdot \\
c_m
\end{bmatrix}$$ Is this correct?? (Wondering)

The product is not commutative, so that should be
$$\Big (\phi^{(j)}\Big )^{-1} u^0=\begin{bmatrix}
c_1\\
c_2\\
\cdot\\
\cdot\\
\cdot \\
c_m
\end{bmatrix}$$
Now we have the vector $\begin{bmatrix}
c_1\\
c_2\\
\cdot\\
\cdot\\
\cdot \\
c_m
\end{bmatrix}$. How can we write the formula for $c_j$ ?? (Wondering)

That is a formula for $c_j$. To simplify it, we'd need more information, like $A$ being symmetric. (Wasntme)

I found in my book the following solution $$u(t)=\sum_{j=1}^m e^{\lambda t}(u(0), \phi^{(j)})\phi^{(j)}$$ where $(\cdot , \cdot)$ is the euclidean dot product.
But how did we find that?? (Wondering)

Looks there is an assumption in there that the eigenvectors are orthonormal.
I think that is only possible if the matrix $A$ is symmetric, but that does not seem to be given - or is it? (Wondering)
 

FAQ: How can we find the coefficients?

How do we determine the coefficients in a mathematical equation?

To find the coefficients in a mathematical equation, we use a technique called regression analysis. This involves using mathematical algorithms to analyze data and determine the values of the coefficients that best fit the data.

Can we find coefficients without using regression analysis?

In some cases, we can find coefficients without using regression analysis. If the equation is simple enough, we can use algebraic methods to solve for the coefficients. However, regression analysis is typically the most accurate and efficient way to determine coefficients.

What is the importance of finding accurate coefficients in scientific research?

Finding accurate coefficients is crucial in scientific research because they help us understand the relationships between variables and make predictions based on collected data. They also allow us to create models and simulations that can be used to study complex systems and make informed decisions.

How can we ensure the coefficients we find are reliable?

To ensure the reliability of coefficients, we must use rigorous methods and techniques and have a large and representative sample of data. It is also important to properly validate and test the accuracy of the coefficients and the resulting equations.

Can we use coefficients from one equation to solve another similar equation?

In some cases, we can use coefficients from one equation to solve another similar equation. This is especially true if the equations have the same variables and similar data. However, it is important to validate the coefficients and make sure they are appropriate for the specific equation being solved.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
0
Views
731
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top