
Algebra PreAlgebra and Basic Algebra Math Forum 
 LinkBack  Thread Tools  Display Modes 
April 17th, 2009, 11:15 AM  #1 
Newbie Joined: Apr 2009 Posts: 2 Thanks: 0  Reverse solve f(x)?
I don't even know if this is possible, but if I'm given f(1)=4; f(=37; f(3=265; f(66)=529; f(100)=922; Is there a way I can determine was the equation is? Or do I just not have enough information? 
April 17th, 2009, 01:29 PM  #2 
Senior Member Joined: Feb 2009 From: Adelaide, Australia Posts: 1,519 Thanks: 3  Re: Reverse solve f(x)?
If these are observations from an experiment, you need a theory as to what kind of function you are dealing with. You can always find a polynomial which passes exactly through all points. If f(p) = P, f(q) = Q, f(r) = R, et cetera, up to n points, then solving the following for a, b, c, ... yields the polynomial which passes through the points. For your problem, there is the exact solution a = 2690755825098139/9676163421751760 b = 28995251727231868/8085932936232345 c = 4132022610192845/30031568564477792 d = 326183591/208301421328 e = 7844227/1041507106640 or roughly This method (one of many) is unsuitable if the number of points is large. 
April 17th, 2009, 02:07 PM  #3 
Newbie Joined: Apr 2009 Posts: 2 Thanks: 0  Re: Reverse solve f(x)?
Okay, I see where you are going with it thanks!

April 17th, 2009, 02:43 PM  #4 
Senior Member Joined: Jul 2008 Posts: 895 Thanks: 0  Re: Reverse solve f(x)?
Polynomial regression, using "Graph" freeware, available from http://www.padowan.dk : f(x) = 0.035001795*x^2+5.7852048*x6.1104195 
April 17th, 2009, 05:23 PM  #5 
Global Moderator Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 20,833 Thanks: 2161 
Hi NumberA, where did your values come from? Notice that the above methods are not very good at giving you an "appropriate" value for f(0); there's little scope for improvement with so little information.

April 19th, 2009, 11:03 AM  #6  
Senior Member Joined: Apr 2009 From: Mesa, Arizona Posts: 161 Thanks: 0  Re: Reverse solve f(x)? Quote:
*one should note that the smoothness of f is sometime harder than just it plain continuity or even worse just the existence of these points alone. For example, what is the algebraic equivalence of the infinite produce as a varies over R\{38} of (x  a) in the denominator of a rational function? Surely one approach is the use of multiple limit, double limits over the natural as our concern is rather of numerical by nature and hence the usage of exp to relay it in addition as negative power of e. Yet, one right the way "notice a jump" since e^(x) is continous in the real and that what concerned is not even in the domain to begin with. Hence one deduce that by the real definition of function itself the question is not welldefined in a sense but one can continue base on the fact of function composition and its related continuity. Since e is continuous the outer limit, both of them, pass thru sequentially and one naturally have a integrallike summation. One should also take a note of the series digital representation of the a's, thereby exchanging index for another sum. Thus one is essentially taking the trianglespike integration of ln(x), that is, again taking advantage of the topology in the domain to have a fat triagular base as in "1/2 of a dx." Note, at this point one already have an equation that goes nowhere with the exception of the indicated points. Put is not wary of finding a "honest" answer as one notice of a familar trick of e to an integral in O.D.E. Edit: as one already know the nature of singularity of natural log, however, exp(ln(1/x)) as x going to zero take advantage of the nature of infinity and use it, this is not really consider a technique per say but can be study in depth as its generality. By inserting it formulation against the background of an O.D.E. one hope it lead to something that is more concrete from what one already have rather something that is "out of the blue." For example, on can have a surface solution that have a missing string with some leftover attachment. Edit 2: the nature of how one label each symbol is important, for example, formally one set f := the produce of the mentioned denominator but actually work with f(k, n) and its pointwise convergent in the onedimensional setting. I have not work with it personally but it has two "seeable results" that are concrete one is an one variable expression which has most of it points going toward infinity and the other is the mentioned two variables overlay, which can be similfy by setting one to a particular constant. Thus to this end, there are more than on way to approach the former as one can use orthogonal function to approximate an expanding outward to infinity of constant functions and it horizontal expand as it mimic; as if trading the lack of expression for two limits within the real. Still yet, this poster will undertake another method. Edit 3: for example the constant function 1 with a hole at zero has the algebraic close form of x/x, however it is analytically not as useful as the function define by 1/abs(x)^(Monster(8^(Monster(abs(x))abs(x)ln(abs(x + 1))) even though it is clearly not equal as one get near the hole and whereas the latter is managable (as it is differentiable without disappearing, add and substract and what else without major loss of structural upheld,...) and it former is still an abstraction of the mind. Edit 4: I guess part of my personality is not being slick and mathematics is just a hobby. But notice the inner function in the denominator. Even though the example in Edit 3 seem like it has not much to do with the question at hand but it does. Indeed, one can use a central expression as a focal point and arrive at another expression to which one can use a system of 2 by 2 (note one have to get pass the equated equality, it is in actuality a 4 expression finder strictly speaking of course) to simlify what is asked in Edit 2 beside the whatever else methods one now have at will. And this is the method I had in mind in Edit 2, to literately push the parallelhorizons to negative or positive infinite where theirs vertical slope smash at a single point; that is, one part of the rational function is going to negative infinity and nexttoitright is going to positive infinity such that the concerned curvature meet. Thus, in a sense the door is open to find a concrete managable function I think this poster asked. Edit 5: I think I know why he/she/they asked it. Perhaps to write an analyticalprogram base language perhaps.  

Tags 
reverse, solve 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Reverse Quaternion Kinematics equations. BVP?  zuba  Applied Math  1  December 19th, 2012 02:58 AM 
reverse engineering a graph  ravynware  Algebra  0  April 15th, 2012 07:11 PM 
reverse n  vdrn  Number Theory  28  October 22nd, 2011 04:07 PM 
Reverse Modulo  swtrse  Number Theory  2  August 6th, 2009 04:53 AM 
Reverse calculation  Clox  Algebra  2  January 23rd, 2008 12:24 AM 