You are not logged in.
#1 2013-02-25 21:13:42
- panicoschr
- Member
Offline
Standard Deviation
Hello. Can someone help me on this ?
Is it possible to calculate Standard Deviation for points distrubuted in 3-axis?
X Y Z.
Thanks
#2 2013-02-25 21:20:24
- bobbym
- Administrator
Online
Re: Standard Deviation
Hi;
Welcome to the forum. You could get the standard deviation of the x's, then the y's and then the z's.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics.
I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on.
#3 2013-02-25 22:35:12
- bobbym
- Administrator
Online
Re: Standard Deviation
Standard deviation like a mean works on a list of elements not on 3 at a time.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics.
I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on.
#4 2013-03-22 01:35:29
- panicoschr
- Member
Offline
Re: Standard Deviation
Hello again
i have another issue, if you could assist.
I have an array of integers from 0 - 250 positions, each one containing an integer. Is it possible to get a single value for this array, so that I can tell the difference between this array and other future arrays? Perhaps an integral?
#5 2013-03-22 01:39:17
- bobbym
- Administrator
Online
Re: Standard Deviation
There are several ideas but I would need to know a little bit more.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics.
I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on.
#6 2013-03-22 02:10:16
- bobbym
- Administrator
Online
Re: Standard Deviation
Hi;
You are saying that you are using an array to keep track of 251 colors. You are assigning each box to a color and incrementing it by one each time you find one?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics.
I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on.
#7 2013-03-22 02:19:42
- bobbym
- Administrator
Online
Re: Standard Deviation
Okay, what are you trying to do with that? Do you have some other array to compare it to?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics.
I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on.
#8 2013-03-22 02:26:52
- panicoschr
- Member
Offline
Re: Standard Deviation
it would be easy to compare it with another array, slot by slot. But i want to get a value out of each array. Thinking of the array as a graph-> can i get a value out of it? area perhaps?distance of the area from 0? perhaps 2 or 3 small areas on a graph separated by 0 color values? sorry i can not think anything to compare 2 graphs that may look completely different.
#9 2013-03-22 02:35:11
- bobbym
- Administrator
Online
Re: Standard Deviation
You want to turn the array into a single number? This could very well take much more time than comparing them element by element.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics.
I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on.
#11 2013-03-22 02:44:18
- bobbym
- Administrator
Online
Re: Standard Deviation
You are using some programming language?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics.
I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on.
#13 2013-03-22 02:49:30
- bobbym
- Administrator
Online
Re: Standard Deviation
Does the new C++ have multiprecision arithmetic yet?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics.
I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on.
#14 2013-03-22 02:54:03
- panicoschr
- Member
Offline
Re: Standard Deviation
I don't know what is this.
But i know it has fields like float and double.
Last edited by panicoschr (2013-03-22 02:54:25)
#15 2013-03-22 02:56:06
- bobbym
- Administrator
Online
Re: Standard Deviation
It still only has 16 digits of precision is what I mean. Basically that means only 16 digits in any number.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics.
I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on.
#16 2013-03-22 03:14:59
- bobbym
- Administrator
Online
Re: Standard Deviation
No, not exactly. Remember order counts in your array so you just can't add up the numbers or multiply them. The simplest thing of course is the decimal system. How high are the numbers in the each array?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics.
I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on.
#17 2013-03-22 05:42:31
- panicoschr
- Member
Offline
Re: Standard Deviation
sorry i had to leave for some time. I made a small testing , saw max no = 160. Of course most of the slots are value 0. Lets say only 30 slots have a value {3,4, 10 , 20 , 34 etc)
#18 2013-03-22 09:40:17
- bobbym
- Administrator
Online
Re: Standard Deviation
Hmmm, that is going to be a problem.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
90% of mathematicians do not understand 90% of currently published mathematics.
I am willing to wager that over 75% of the new words that appeared were nothing more than spelling errors that caught on.