I Question about ARMA process: Changing a Stochastic Process into a Transfer Function

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on converting an ARMA process into a transfer function. A participant questions the correctness of their equation, receiving feedback that the powers of z are off by one due to single-step signal delays. Another contributor suggests using z^{-1} for delays instead of z, providing a corrected equation for the transfer function. The exchange highlights the importance of understanding time indexing in stochastic processes. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the nuances of transforming ARMA processes into transfer functions accurately.
e0ne199
Messages
56
Reaction score
5
TL;DR Summary
I want to change arma process into transfer function, I have done it but I am unsure if it is correct or not
hello everyone, I have a question about stochastic process (ARMA process) that looks like this :
1728286558931.png

I would like to change it into a transfer function, so the final result looks like this :
1728286499447.png

My question is, is this equation correct? if it is not correct, what should I change for this equation? any response is really appreciated, thx.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think that's not exactly right, but it's a good try. The right side has single-step signal delays of 1, 2, and 3. So your powers of ##z## (on one side or the other) are off by 1. (I am assuming that the index in your variables are related to time such that k-1 is a step backward in time, a one step delay, ##1/z##)
I am not an expert at this, but here is what I would do. I prefer to work with the ##z^{-1}## single-step delay, rather than the ##z## look into the future, but that is just a matter of preference. I would get:
##W(z)(1-1.08z^{-1}+0.81z^{-2})=V(z)(z^{-1}+0.1z^{-2}-0.9z^{-3})##
So ##W(z)/V(z) = (z^2+0.1z-0.9)/(z^3-1.08z^2+0.81z)##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Likes PhDeezNutz and e0ne199
FactChecker said:
I think that's not exactly right, but it's a good try. The right side has single-step signal delays of 1, 2, and 3. So your powers of ##z## (on one side or the other) are off by 1. (I am assuming that the index in your variables are related to time such that k-1 is a step backward in time, a one step delay, ##1/z##)
I am not an expert at this, but here is what I would do. I prefer to work with the ##z^{-1}## single-step delay, rather than the ##z## look into the future, but that is just a matter of preference. I would get:
##W(z)(1-1.08z^{-1}+0.81z^{-2})=V(z)(z^{-1}+0.1z^{-2}-0.9z^{-3})##
So ##W(z)/V(z) = (z^2+0.1z-0.9)/(z^3-1.08z^2+0.81z)##.
hahaha thank you, that explanation is what I have been missing until now 😁
 
  • Like
Likes PhDeezNutz, berkeman and FactChecker
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Back
Top