We respect your right to privacy. You can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Your cookie preferences will apply across our website.
Hi all,
In my numerical analysis class we have been discussing lagrange and chebyshev interpolation
my professor derived a bound for the chebyshev interpolation [math] Q_nf(x) [/math] that is
[math] |Q_nf(x)| \leq ... \leq ||f||_{\infty} \int_0^{\pi} |\frac{\sin((n+1/2)\theta)}{2\sin(\theta /2)} | d\theta [/math] where [ math] \theta = \arccos x [/math]
they then conclude that [math] ||Q_n|| = \int_0^{\pi} |\frac{\sin((n+1/2)\theta)}{2\sin(\theta /2)} | d\theta [/math]
So my question is how do you make the jump
obviously we can take the sup over [math] Q_nf(x) [/math] to get [math] \frac{||Q_nf(x)||_{\infty}}{||f||_{\infty}} \leq \int_0^{\pi} |\frac{\sin((n+1/2)\theta)}{2\sin(\theta /2)} | d\theta [/math] but how do we get the final result about operator norm? seems more like we're bounding [math] ||Q_n|| [/math] instead of equating it
What is Q_n(f)(x)?That supremum norm is taken over what set?
>>7984381
[math] Q_n f(x) = \sum_{k=0}^n <f,\phi_k> \phi_k(x) [/math] where [math] <g,h> = \int_a^b g(x)h(x)w(x) dx [/math] where [math] w(x) [/math] is some weight function on given fixed points [math] x_0 \leq x_1 \leq ... \leq x_n, x_i \in [a,b] [/math]
>>7984381
so the sup is taken over [math] x \in [a,b] [/math]
>>7984405
ah fuck i forgot [math] {\phi_0,...,\phi_n}[/math] form an orthonormal basis
>>7984405
So w(x) is a step funcion, what do you mean by "weight function on given fixed points"?
>>7984447
The same guy, I thinkt the thing is that you have to find a norm 1 function that will realise the supremum norm. I would try to plug a chybyshev polynomial for f.
>>7984447
i don't think it's a step function,... it's a term to account for how much you want to count each point in the integral
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthogonality#Orthogonal_functions
>>7984456
i don't quite understand what you mean
my prof went from the bound i did to the conclusion about the operator norm without skipping a beat so i think i either dont quite understand the mateiral or am overlooking something
>>7984468
Then show his proof, maybe we can workout something from it.
>>7984479
ok uses basic def to get going
>>7984502
then develops its a bit into an intergral over cos
then turns the cos term into the sin term we want
finishing turning it into a sign
then thats the last we saw of it in class
>>7984508
>sign
meant sin
then on an assignment he says that we showed the result mentioned in OP, in class, when all we did was bound [math] |Q_nf(x)| [/math] from above
>>7984479
i really don't think the derivation adds anything...
my confusion is just about how bounding the norm of a function can be turned into a sup norm
>>7984515
Holy fuck, I am retarted, >>7984504
The inequality on the top of the page always hodls, so we need only to find a function f witch sup norm equal to 1, such that in that ineaquality we just have equality. But just look on >>7984502
If you plug in f(x)=1 on whole [a,b], then the inequality from >>7984504
becomes an equality.
>>7984358
Your numerical analysis class sounds so much better than mine which is basically designed for engineers.
>>7984586
Well, the idea was that if you put f(x)=1, then you get
[math]Q_nf(x)=\int\sum\phi_k(y)\phi_k(x)w(y)f(y)dy =\int\sum\phi_k(y)\phi_k(x)w(y)dy[/math]
but you actually want to get
[math]Q_nf(x)=\int\sum\phi_k(y)\phi_k(x)w(y)f(y)dy =\int|\sum\phi_k(y)\phi_k(x)w(y)|dy[/math]
So you should use [math]f(x)=sgn(\sum\phi_k(x)(w(x)).[/math] Buuuut that function is not contnouos. I think we can use Urynsohns lemma to approximate [math]f(x)=sgn(\sum\phi_k(x)(w(x)).[/math] with cont. functions g_j(x) in such way that
[math]\lim_{j\to\infty}\int\sum\phi_k(y)\phi_k(x)w(y)g_j (y)dy =\int|\sum\phi_k(y)\phi_k(x)w(y)|dy [/math]
>>7984771
The same guy. This will actually work if we assume that the function [math]w\in C^1[a,b][\math]
>>7984753
That is called numerical METHODS not numerical analysis. It is all an engineer needs.
>>7984358
what the fuck is this? I am kindly asking someone to explain this. Is this meme or is it significant?
>>7985567
Numerical analysis. It's applied math, so it's pretty important. It tells you how good an approximation is.
>>7985567
basically you're approximating a function based on n points
you can read more here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation
>>7984771
>>7984802
update, i talked to my prof today and this is the general idea
you have to explicitly find an f (and i think yours works here although i haven't looked too closerly) to conclude (he skipped the step when concluding on our assignment