How do I fit a resonance curve?How to guess the correct fitting function to some data?Fitting of exponential data gives me a constant functionCurve Fitting and Multiple ExperimentsPower fit to some experimental dataShould a Gaussian Curve Always Be Drawn Symmetrically?Arrhenius Fit: Linear or exponential form?Reduced chi-squared value for noiseless spectraDamped Harmonic Curve fit and ForceConstant wind drag while falling?Removing zero-counts in exponential decay measurement

Does int main() need a declaration on C++?

What is the fastest integer factorization to break RSA?

In Bayesian inference, why are some terms dropped from the posterior predictive?

What Exploit Are These User Agents Trying to Use?

One verb to replace 'be a member of' a club

How does a dynamic QR code work?

Car headlights in a world without electricity

What reasons are there for a Capitalist to oppose a 100% inheritance tax?

How do I exit BASH while loop using modulus operator?

ssTTsSTtRrriinInnnnNNNIiinngg

Rotate ASCII Art by 45 Degrees

Finitely generated matrix groups whose eigenvalues are all algebraic

How could indestructible materials be used in power generation?

Mathematica command that allows it to read my intentions

How to compactly explain secondary and tertiary characters without resorting to stereotypes?

Using "tail" to follow a file without displaying the most recent lines

What is an equivalently powerful replacement spell for the Yuan-Ti's Suggestion spell?

Is it inappropriate for a student to attend their mentor's dissertation defense?

Processor speed limited at 0.4 Ghz

GFCI outlets - can they be repaired? Are they really needed at the end of a circuit?

How to stretch the corners of this image so that it looks like a perfect rectangle?

What are the G forces leaving Earth orbit?

Is it a bad idea to plug the other end of ESD strap to wall ground?

In the UK, is it possible to get a referendum by a court decision?



How do I fit a resonance curve?


How to guess the correct fitting function to some data?Fitting of exponential data gives me a constant functionCurve Fitting and Multiple ExperimentsPower fit to some experimental dataShould a Gaussian Curve Always Be Drawn Symmetrically?Arrhenius Fit: Linear or exponential form?Reduced chi-squared value for noiseless spectraDamped Harmonic Curve fit and ForceConstant wind drag while falling?Removing zero-counts in exponential decay measurement













7












$begingroup$


In an experiment, I collected data points $ (ω,υ(ω))$ that are modeled by the equation:



$$ υ(ω)=fracωCsqrt(ω^2-ω_0^2)^2+γ^2ω^2 ,.$$



How can do I fit the data to the above correlation? And how can I extract $γ$ through this process?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
    $endgroup$
    – robert bristow-johnson
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    $C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
    $endgroup$
    – robert bristow-johnson
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
    $endgroup$
    – tobi_s
    yesterday






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
    $endgroup$
    – Kyle Kanos
    yesterday















7












$begingroup$


In an experiment, I collected data points $ (ω,υ(ω))$ that are modeled by the equation:



$$ υ(ω)=fracωCsqrt(ω^2-ω_0^2)^2+γ^2ω^2 ,.$$



How can do I fit the data to the above correlation? And how can I extract $γ$ through this process?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
    $endgroup$
    – robert bristow-johnson
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    $C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
    $endgroup$
    – robert bristow-johnson
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
    $endgroup$
    – tobi_s
    yesterday






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
    $endgroup$
    – Kyle Kanos
    yesterday













7












7








7


1



$begingroup$


In an experiment, I collected data points $ (ω,υ(ω))$ that are modeled by the equation:



$$ υ(ω)=fracωCsqrt(ω^2-ω_0^2)^2+γ^2ω^2 ,.$$



How can do I fit the data to the above correlation? And how can I extract $γ$ through this process?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




In an experiment, I collected data points $ (ω,υ(ω))$ that are modeled by the equation:



$$ υ(ω)=fracωCsqrt(ω^2-ω_0^2)^2+γ^2ω^2 ,.$$



How can do I fit the data to the above correlation? And how can I extract $γ$ through this process?







experimental-physics correlation-functions data-analysis






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited yesterday









knzhou

45.7k11122220




45.7k11122220










asked 2 days ago









Andreas MastronikolisAndreas Mastronikolis

876




876











  • $begingroup$
    almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
    $endgroup$
    – robert bristow-johnson
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    $C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
    $endgroup$
    – robert bristow-johnson
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
    $endgroup$
    – tobi_s
    yesterday






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
    $endgroup$
    – Kyle Kanos
    yesterday
















  • $begingroup$
    almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
    $endgroup$
    – robert bristow-johnson
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    $C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
    $endgroup$
    – robert bristow-johnson
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
    $endgroup$
    – tobi_s
    yesterday






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
    $endgroup$
    – Kyle Kanos
    yesterday















$begingroup$
almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
yesterday





$begingroup$
almost looks like the magnitude response of a second-order bandpass filter. other than least-squares fit (or some other $L_p$ metric of error), i dunno how else to get $gamma$. seems to me that the least-squares fit also needs to find $omega_0$ and $C$. but i think $C$ can come out in the wash.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
yesterday













$begingroup$
$C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
yesterday




$begingroup$
$C$ can be absorbed into $gamma$.
$endgroup$
– robert bristow-johnson
yesterday












$begingroup$
You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
yesterday




$begingroup$
You said nothing about how you estimate the errors of your measured points, and what your criterion for a good fit would be. In general, you would want to maximize some likelihood function, in practice (with Gaussian 1D errors on the data points) a least-squares fit may be good enough. Your case probably involves bins ($omega$ being a continuous variable) and the Poisson distribution (few entries in bins far away from $omega_0$), so a more complex Log-Likelihood approach could be called for.
$endgroup$
– tobi_s
yesterday




3




3




$begingroup$
I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
yesterday




$begingroup$
I strongly disagree that this should be posted on Mathematics, as suggested by the close votes on it. I think such questions are on topic here, but were they not then Cross Validated would be the most obvious choice.
$endgroup$
– Kyle Kanos
yesterday










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















10












$begingroup$

What you want to find is the parameters $theta=(C, omega_0, gamma)$ that minimizes the difference between $nu(omega|theta)$ (the curve given the parameters) and the measured $nu_i$ values.



The most popular method is least mean square fitting, which minimizes the sum of the squares of the differences. One can also do it by formulating the normal equations and solve it as a (potentially big) linear equation system. Another approach is the Gauss-Newton algorithm, a simple iterative method to do it. It is a good exercise to implement the solution oneself, but once you have done it once or twice it is best to rely on some software package.



Note that this kind of fitting works well when you know the functional form (your equation for $nu(omega)$), since you can ensure only that the parameters that matter are included. If you try to fit some general polynomial or function you can get overfitting (some complex curve that fits all the data but has nothing to do with your problem) besides the problem of identifying the parameters you care about.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$




















    8












    $begingroup$

    Don't try using any general-purpose curve fitting algorithm for this.



    The form of your function looks like a frequency response function, with the two unknown parameters $omega_0$ and $gamma$ - i.e. the resonant frequency, and the damping parameter. The function you specified omits an important feature if this is measured data, namely the relative phase between the "force" driving the oscillation and the response.



    If you didn't measure the phase at each frequency, repeat the experiment, because that is critical information.



    When you have the amplitude and phase data, there are curve fitting techniques devised specifically for this problem of "system identification" in experimental modal analysis. A simple one is the so-called "circle fitting" method. If you make a Nyquist plot of your measured data (i.e. plot imaginary part of the response against the real part), the section of the curve near the resonance is a circle, and you can fit a circle to the measured data and find the parameters from it.



    In practice, a simplistic approach assuming the system only has one resonance often doesn't work well, because the response of a real system near resonance also includes the off-resonance response to all the other vibration modes. If the resonant frequencies are well separated and lightly damped, it is possible to correct for this while fitting "one mode at a time". If this is not the case, you need methods that can identify several resonances simultaneously from one response function.



    Rather than re-invent the wheel, use existing code. The signal processing toolbox in MATLAB would be a good starting point - for example https://uk.mathworks.com/help/signal/ref/modalfit.html






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$








    • 7




      $begingroup$
      That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
      $endgroup$
      – Emilio Pisanty
      2 days ago










    • $begingroup$
      what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
      $endgroup$
      – IamAStudent
      2 days ago






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
      $endgroup$
      – Federico Poloni
      yesterday



















    6












    $begingroup$

    If we put:



    $$Y = fracomega^2u(omega)^2$$



    and



    $$X = omega^2$$



    the equation becomes:



    $$Y =fracX^2C^2 +frac(gamma^2 - 2 omega_0^2)C^2 X + fracomega_0^4C^2$$



    You can then extract the coefficients using polynomial fitting. To get the least-squares fit right, you have to compute the errors in $Y$ and $X$ for each data point from the measurement errors in $omega$ and $u(omega)$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 4




      $begingroup$
      This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
      $endgroup$
      – tobi_s
      yesterday


















    0












    $begingroup$

    Are you looking for something like polynomial regression? The general idea is, if you have measured pairs of (x, y(x)) and you are looking for find a fit of the form:



    $$y = alpha_0 + alpha_1 x + alpha_2 x^2 ...$$



    You can write this in matrix form as:



    $$beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ y_3 \ vdots \ y_n endbmatrix = beginbmatrix 1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_3 & x_3^2 & cdots \ vdots & vdots & vdots & vdots \ 1 & x_n &x_n^2 & cdots endbmatrix beginbmatrix alpha_0 \ alpha_1 \ alpha_2 \ vdots \ alpha_m endbmatrix$$



    This can now be solved for your coefficients, $alpha_i$. That being said, and as was hinted at in your comments, I've never actually done this, and have instead used non-linear fitting functions provided by libraries.



    More information on polynomial regression on the wikipedia page.



    Edit: As you say in the comments, this method is only applicable if you can write your function that you wish to fit in polynomial form, which I don't think you can do for your example. In which case you are best off referring to the other answers to this question.






    share|cite|improve this answer










    New contributor




    Anon1759 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    $endgroup$








    • 2




      $begingroup$
      The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
      $endgroup$
      – Andreas Mastronikolis
      2 days ago










    • $begingroup$
      Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
      $endgroup$
      – Anon1759
      2 days ago










    • $begingroup$
      The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
      $endgroup$
      – Vladimir F
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      @AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
      $endgroup$
      – Vladimir F
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      @VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
      $endgroup$
      – Federico Poloni
      yesterday












    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "151"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f469754%2fhow-do-i-fit-a-resonance-curve%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    10












    $begingroup$

    What you want to find is the parameters $theta=(C, omega_0, gamma)$ that minimizes the difference between $nu(omega|theta)$ (the curve given the parameters) and the measured $nu_i$ values.



    The most popular method is least mean square fitting, which minimizes the sum of the squares of the differences. One can also do it by formulating the normal equations and solve it as a (potentially big) linear equation system. Another approach is the Gauss-Newton algorithm, a simple iterative method to do it. It is a good exercise to implement the solution oneself, but once you have done it once or twice it is best to rely on some software package.



    Note that this kind of fitting works well when you know the functional form (your equation for $nu(omega)$), since you can ensure only that the parameters that matter are included. If you try to fit some general polynomial or function you can get overfitting (some complex curve that fits all the data but has nothing to do with your problem) besides the problem of identifying the parameters you care about.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$

















      10












      $begingroup$

      What you want to find is the parameters $theta=(C, omega_0, gamma)$ that minimizes the difference between $nu(omega|theta)$ (the curve given the parameters) and the measured $nu_i$ values.



      The most popular method is least mean square fitting, which minimizes the sum of the squares of the differences. One can also do it by formulating the normal equations and solve it as a (potentially big) linear equation system. Another approach is the Gauss-Newton algorithm, a simple iterative method to do it. It is a good exercise to implement the solution oneself, but once you have done it once or twice it is best to rely on some software package.



      Note that this kind of fitting works well when you know the functional form (your equation for $nu(omega)$), since you can ensure only that the parameters that matter are included. If you try to fit some general polynomial or function you can get overfitting (some complex curve that fits all the data but has nothing to do with your problem) besides the problem of identifying the parameters you care about.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$















        10












        10








        10





        $begingroup$

        What you want to find is the parameters $theta=(C, omega_0, gamma)$ that minimizes the difference between $nu(omega|theta)$ (the curve given the parameters) and the measured $nu_i$ values.



        The most popular method is least mean square fitting, which minimizes the sum of the squares of the differences. One can also do it by formulating the normal equations and solve it as a (potentially big) linear equation system. Another approach is the Gauss-Newton algorithm, a simple iterative method to do it. It is a good exercise to implement the solution oneself, but once you have done it once or twice it is best to rely on some software package.



        Note that this kind of fitting works well when you know the functional form (your equation for $nu(omega)$), since you can ensure only that the parameters that matter are included. If you try to fit some general polynomial or function you can get overfitting (some complex curve that fits all the data but has nothing to do with your problem) besides the problem of identifying the parameters you care about.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        What you want to find is the parameters $theta=(C, omega_0, gamma)$ that minimizes the difference between $nu(omega|theta)$ (the curve given the parameters) and the measured $nu_i$ values.



        The most popular method is least mean square fitting, which minimizes the sum of the squares of the differences. One can also do it by formulating the normal equations and solve it as a (potentially big) linear equation system. Another approach is the Gauss-Newton algorithm, a simple iterative method to do it. It is a good exercise to implement the solution oneself, but once you have done it once or twice it is best to rely on some software package.



        Note that this kind of fitting works well when you know the functional form (your equation for $nu(omega)$), since you can ensure only that the parameters that matter are included. If you try to fit some general polynomial or function you can get overfitting (some complex curve that fits all the data but has nothing to do with your problem) besides the problem of identifying the parameters you care about.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered 2 days ago









        Anders SandbergAnders Sandberg

        10k21530




        10k21530





















            8












            $begingroup$

            Don't try using any general-purpose curve fitting algorithm for this.



            The form of your function looks like a frequency response function, with the two unknown parameters $omega_0$ and $gamma$ - i.e. the resonant frequency, and the damping parameter. The function you specified omits an important feature if this is measured data, namely the relative phase between the "force" driving the oscillation and the response.



            If you didn't measure the phase at each frequency, repeat the experiment, because that is critical information.



            When you have the amplitude and phase data, there are curve fitting techniques devised specifically for this problem of "system identification" in experimental modal analysis. A simple one is the so-called "circle fitting" method. If you make a Nyquist plot of your measured data (i.e. plot imaginary part of the response against the real part), the section of the curve near the resonance is a circle, and you can fit a circle to the measured data and find the parameters from it.



            In practice, a simplistic approach assuming the system only has one resonance often doesn't work well, because the response of a real system near resonance also includes the off-resonance response to all the other vibration modes. If the resonant frequencies are well separated and lightly damped, it is possible to correct for this while fitting "one mode at a time". If this is not the case, you need methods that can identify several resonances simultaneously from one response function.



            Rather than re-invent the wheel, use existing code. The signal processing toolbox in MATLAB would be a good starting point - for example https://uk.mathworks.com/help/signal/ref/modalfit.html






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$








            • 7




              $begingroup$
              That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
              $endgroup$
              – Emilio Pisanty
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
              $endgroup$
              – IamAStudent
              2 days ago






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
              $endgroup$
              – Federico Poloni
              yesterday
















            8












            $begingroup$

            Don't try using any general-purpose curve fitting algorithm for this.



            The form of your function looks like a frequency response function, with the two unknown parameters $omega_0$ and $gamma$ - i.e. the resonant frequency, and the damping parameter. The function you specified omits an important feature if this is measured data, namely the relative phase between the "force" driving the oscillation and the response.



            If you didn't measure the phase at each frequency, repeat the experiment, because that is critical information.



            When you have the amplitude and phase data, there are curve fitting techniques devised specifically for this problem of "system identification" in experimental modal analysis. A simple one is the so-called "circle fitting" method. If you make a Nyquist plot of your measured data (i.e. plot imaginary part of the response against the real part), the section of the curve near the resonance is a circle, and you can fit a circle to the measured data and find the parameters from it.



            In practice, a simplistic approach assuming the system only has one resonance often doesn't work well, because the response of a real system near resonance also includes the off-resonance response to all the other vibration modes. If the resonant frequencies are well separated and lightly damped, it is possible to correct for this while fitting "one mode at a time". If this is not the case, you need methods that can identify several resonances simultaneously from one response function.



            Rather than re-invent the wheel, use existing code. The signal processing toolbox in MATLAB would be a good starting point - for example https://uk.mathworks.com/help/signal/ref/modalfit.html






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$








            • 7




              $begingroup$
              That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
              $endgroup$
              – Emilio Pisanty
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
              $endgroup$
              – IamAStudent
              2 days ago






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
              $endgroup$
              – Federico Poloni
              yesterday














            8












            8








            8





            $begingroup$

            Don't try using any general-purpose curve fitting algorithm for this.



            The form of your function looks like a frequency response function, with the two unknown parameters $omega_0$ and $gamma$ - i.e. the resonant frequency, and the damping parameter. The function you specified omits an important feature if this is measured data, namely the relative phase between the "force" driving the oscillation and the response.



            If you didn't measure the phase at each frequency, repeat the experiment, because that is critical information.



            When you have the amplitude and phase data, there are curve fitting techniques devised specifically for this problem of "system identification" in experimental modal analysis. A simple one is the so-called "circle fitting" method. If you make a Nyquist plot of your measured data (i.e. plot imaginary part of the response against the real part), the section of the curve near the resonance is a circle, and you can fit a circle to the measured data and find the parameters from it.



            In practice, a simplistic approach assuming the system only has one resonance often doesn't work well, because the response of a real system near resonance also includes the off-resonance response to all the other vibration modes. If the resonant frequencies are well separated and lightly damped, it is possible to correct for this while fitting "one mode at a time". If this is not the case, you need methods that can identify several resonances simultaneously from one response function.



            Rather than re-invent the wheel, use existing code. The signal processing toolbox in MATLAB would be a good starting point - for example https://uk.mathworks.com/help/signal/ref/modalfit.html






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            Don't try using any general-purpose curve fitting algorithm for this.



            The form of your function looks like a frequency response function, with the two unknown parameters $omega_0$ and $gamma$ - i.e. the resonant frequency, and the damping parameter. The function you specified omits an important feature if this is measured data, namely the relative phase between the "force" driving the oscillation and the response.



            If you didn't measure the phase at each frequency, repeat the experiment, because that is critical information.



            When you have the amplitude and phase data, there are curve fitting techniques devised specifically for this problem of "system identification" in experimental modal analysis. A simple one is the so-called "circle fitting" method. If you make a Nyquist plot of your measured data (i.e. plot imaginary part of the response against the real part), the section of the curve near the resonance is a circle, and you can fit a circle to the measured data and find the parameters from it.



            In practice, a simplistic approach assuming the system only has one resonance often doesn't work well, because the response of a real system near resonance also includes the off-resonance response to all the other vibration modes. If the resonant frequencies are well separated and lightly damped, it is possible to correct for this while fitting "one mode at a time". If this is not the case, you need methods that can identify several resonances simultaneously from one response function.



            Rather than re-invent the wheel, use existing code. The signal processing toolbox in MATLAB would be a good starting point - for example https://uk.mathworks.com/help/signal/ref/modalfit.html







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited 2 days ago

























            answered 2 days ago









            alephzeroalephzero

            5,65621120




            5,65621120







            • 7




              $begingroup$
              That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
              $endgroup$
              – Emilio Pisanty
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
              $endgroup$
              – IamAStudent
              2 days ago






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
              $endgroup$
              – Federico Poloni
              yesterday













            • 7




              $begingroup$
              That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
              $endgroup$
              – Emilio Pisanty
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
              $endgroup$
              – IamAStudent
              2 days ago






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
              $endgroup$
              – Federico Poloni
              yesterday








            7




            7




            $begingroup$
            That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
            $endgroup$
            – Emilio Pisanty
            2 days ago




            $begingroup$
            That is, of course, if the phase information is experimentally accessible. It's measurable in plenty of systems, but there are also many cases where it is either inaccessible or much more expensive to access.
            $endgroup$
            – Emilio Pisanty
            2 days ago












            $begingroup$
            what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
            $endgroup$
            – IamAStudent
            2 days ago




            $begingroup$
            what is a well-known method for identifying several closely spaced resonances at the same time?
            $endgroup$
            – IamAStudent
            2 days ago




            2




            2




            $begingroup$
            What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
            $endgroup$
            – Federico Poloni
            yesterday





            $begingroup$
            What are the advantages of these algorithms with respect to the general-purpose ones? What cost function do they minimize?
            $endgroup$
            – Federico Poloni
            yesterday












            6












            $begingroup$

            If we put:



            $$Y = fracomega^2u(omega)^2$$



            and



            $$X = omega^2$$



            the equation becomes:



            $$Y =fracX^2C^2 +frac(gamma^2 - 2 omega_0^2)C^2 X + fracomega_0^4C^2$$



            You can then extract the coefficients using polynomial fitting. To get the least-squares fit right, you have to compute the errors in $Y$ and $X$ for each data point from the measurement errors in $omega$ and $u(omega)$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$








            • 4




              $begingroup$
              This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
              $endgroup$
              – tobi_s
              yesterday















            6












            $begingroup$

            If we put:



            $$Y = fracomega^2u(omega)^2$$



            and



            $$X = omega^2$$



            the equation becomes:



            $$Y =fracX^2C^2 +frac(gamma^2 - 2 omega_0^2)C^2 X + fracomega_0^4C^2$$



            You can then extract the coefficients using polynomial fitting. To get the least-squares fit right, you have to compute the errors in $Y$ and $X$ for each data point from the measurement errors in $omega$ and $u(omega)$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$








            • 4




              $begingroup$
              This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
              $endgroup$
              – tobi_s
              yesterday













            6












            6








            6





            $begingroup$

            If we put:



            $$Y = fracomega^2u(omega)^2$$



            and



            $$X = omega^2$$



            the equation becomes:



            $$Y =fracX^2C^2 +frac(gamma^2 - 2 omega_0^2)C^2 X + fracomega_0^4C^2$$



            You can then extract the coefficients using polynomial fitting. To get the least-squares fit right, you have to compute the errors in $Y$ and $X$ for each data point from the measurement errors in $omega$ and $u(omega)$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            If we put:



            $$Y = fracomega^2u(omega)^2$$



            and



            $$X = omega^2$$



            the equation becomes:



            $$Y =fracX^2C^2 +frac(gamma^2 - 2 omega_0^2)C^2 X + fracomega_0^4C^2$$



            You can then extract the coefficients using polynomial fitting. To get the least-squares fit right, you have to compute the errors in $Y$ and $X$ for each data point from the measurement errors in $omega$ and $u(omega)$.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered 2 days ago









            Count IblisCount Iblis

            8,46411439




            8,46411439







            • 4




              $begingroup$
              This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
              $endgroup$
              – tobi_s
              yesterday












            • 4




              $begingroup$
              This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
              $endgroup$
              – tobi_s
              yesterday







            4




            4




            $begingroup$
            This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
            $endgroup$
            – tobi_s
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            This is a beautiful transformation, but it will also distort the error distributions of the data points, rendering the fit much harder as result. The preferred approach to fitting depends on your measurement errors (or error estimates) and on whether your data is binned. For unbinned data, if the $omega$ values are exact (or if the error is negligible compared to $v(omega)$), and if the errors on $v(omega)$ are drawn from a Gaussian distribution, a (non-linear) least-squares fit to your data points is hard to beat, as it will also be a maximum-likelihood fit.
            $endgroup$
            – tobi_s
            yesterday











            0












            $begingroup$

            Are you looking for something like polynomial regression? The general idea is, if you have measured pairs of (x, y(x)) and you are looking for find a fit of the form:



            $$y = alpha_0 + alpha_1 x + alpha_2 x^2 ...$$



            You can write this in matrix form as:



            $$beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ y_3 \ vdots \ y_n endbmatrix = beginbmatrix 1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_3 & x_3^2 & cdots \ vdots & vdots & vdots & vdots \ 1 & x_n &x_n^2 & cdots endbmatrix beginbmatrix alpha_0 \ alpha_1 \ alpha_2 \ vdots \ alpha_m endbmatrix$$



            This can now be solved for your coefficients, $alpha_i$. That being said, and as was hinted at in your comments, I've never actually done this, and have instead used non-linear fitting functions provided by libraries.



            More information on polynomial regression on the wikipedia page.



            Edit: As you say in the comments, this method is only applicable if you can write your function that you wish to fit in polynomial form, which I don't think you can do for your example. In which case you are best off referring to the other answers to this question.






            share|cite|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Anon1759 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            $endgroup$








            • 2




              $begingroup$
              The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
              $endgroup$
              – Andreas Mastronikolis
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
              $endgroup$
              – Anon1759
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
              $endgroup$
              – Vladimir F
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
              $endgroup$
              – Vladimir F
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
              $endgroup$
              – Federico Poloni
              yesterday
















            0












            $begingroup$

            Are you looking for something like polynomial regression? The general idea is, if you have measured pairs of (x, y(x)) and you are looking for find a fit of the form:



            $$y = alpha_0 + alpha_1 x + alpha_2 x^2 ...$$



            You can write this in matrix form as:



            $$beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ y_3 \ vdots \ y_n endbmatrix = beginbmatrix 1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_3 & x_3^2 & cdots \ vdots & vdots & vdots & vdots \ 1 & x_n &x_n^2 & cdots endbmatrix beginbmatrix alpha_0 \ alpha_1 \ alpha_2 \ vdots \ alpha_m endbmatrix$$



            This can now be solved for your coefficients, $alpha_i$. That being said, and as was hinted at in your comments, I've never actually done this, and have instead used non-linear fitting functions provided by libraries.



            More information on polynomial regression on the wikipedia page.



            Edit: As you say in the comments, this method is only applicable if you can write your function that you wish to fit in polynomial form, which I don't think you can do for your example. In which case you are best off referring to the other answers to this question.






            share|cite|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Anon1759 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            $endgroup$








            • 2




              $begingroup$
              The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
              $endgroup$
              – Andreas Mastronikolis
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
              $endgroup$
              – Anon1759
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
              $endgroup$
              – Vladimir F
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
              $endgroup$
              – Vladimir F
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
              $endgroup$
              – Federico Poloni
              yesterday














            0












            0








            0





            $begingroup$

            Are you looking for something like polynomial regression? The general idea is, if you have measured pairs of (x, y(x)) and you are looking for find a fit of the form:



            $$y = alpha_0 + alpha_1 x + alpha_2 x^2 ...$$



            You can write this in matrix form as:



            $$beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ y_3 \ vdots \ y_n endbmatrix = beginbmatrix 1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_3 & x_3^2 & cdots \ vdots & vdots & vdots & vdots \ 1 & x_n &x_n^2 & cdots endbmatrix beginbmatrix alpha_0 \ alpha_1 \ alpha_2 \ vdots \ alpha_m endbmatrix$$



            This can now be solved for your coefficients, $alpha_i$. That being said, and as was hinted at in your comments, I've never actually done this, and have instead used non-linear fitting functions provided by libraries.



            More information on polynomial regression on the wikipedia page.



            Edit: As you say in the comments, this method is only applicable if you can write your function that you wish to fit in polynomial form, which I don't think you can do for your example. In which case you are best off referring to the other answers to this question.






            share|cite|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Anon1759 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            $endgroup$



            Are you looking for something like polynomial regression? The general idea is, if you have measured pairs of (x, y(x)) and you are looking for find a fit of the form:



            $$y = alpha_0 + alpha_1 x + alpha_2 x^2 ...$$



            You can write this in matrix form as:



            $$beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ y_3 \ vdots \ y_n endbmatrix = beginbmatrix 1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & cdots \ 1 & x_3 & x_3^2 & cdots \ vdots & vdots & vdots & vdots \ 1 & x_n &x_n^2 & cdots endbmatrix beginbmatrix alpha_0 \ alpha_1 \ alpha_2 \ vdots \ alpha_m endbmatrix$$



            This can now be solved for your coefficients, $alpha_i$. That being said, and as was hinted at in your comments, I've never actually done this, and have instead used non-linear fitting functions provided by libraries.



            More information on polynomial regression on the wikipedia page.



            Edit: As you say in the comments, this method is only applicable if you can write your function that you wish to fit in polynomial form, which I don't think you can do for your example. In which case you are best off referring to the other answers to this question.







            share|cite|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Anon1759 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.









            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited yesterday





















            New contributor




            Anon1759 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.









            answered 2 days ago









            Anon1759Anon1759

            513




            513




            New contributor




            Anon1759 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.





            New contributor





            Anon1759 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            Anon1759 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.







            • 2




              $begingroup$
              The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
              $endgroup$
              – Andreas Mastronikolis
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
              $endgroup$
              – Anon1759
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
              $endgroup$
              – Vladimir F
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
              $endgroup$
              – Vladimir F
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
              $endgroup$
              – Federico Poloni
              yesterday













            • 2




              $begingroup$
              The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
              $endgroup$
              – Andreas Mastronikolis
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
              $endgroup$
              – Anon1759
              2 days ago










            • $begingroup$
              The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
              $endgroup$
              – Vladimir F
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
              $endgroup$
              – Vladimir F
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
              $endgroup$
              – Federico Poloni
              yesterday








            2




            2




            $begingroup$
            The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
            $endgroup$
            – Andreas Mastronikolis
            2 days ago




            $begingroup$
            The answer is yes if the equation can be reduced to a polynomial one. I don't think it can be though.
            $endgroup$
            – Andreas Mastronikolis
            2 days ago












            $begingroup$
            Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
            $endgroup$
            – Anon1759
            2 days ago




            $begingroup$
            Then I think your only choice is to follow the advice as given in Anders Sandberg's answer and use one of the fitting techniques suggested there.
            $endgroup$
            – Anon1759
            2 days ago












            $begingroup$
            The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
            $endgroup$
            – Vladimir F
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            The formula with the Vandermonde matrix is for Linear interpolation, not for linear regeression. Or what am I missing?
            $endgroup$
            – Vladimir F
            yesterday












            $begingroup$
            @AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
            $endgroup$
            – Vladimir F
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            @AndreasMastronikolis You can always connect n+1 points with a Lagrange polynomial of degree n. But I doubt it makes much sense here.
            $endgroup$
            – Vladimir F
            yesterday












            $begingroup$
            @VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
            $endgroup$
            – Federico Poloni
            yesterday





            $begingroup$
            @VladimirF The Vandermonde formula works also for linear regression. You just need to take the pseudoinverse $V^+ = (V^TV)^-1V^T$ of that (rectangular) matrix rather than its classical inverse, i.e., solve the system in the least-squares sense.
            $endgroup$
            – Federico Poloni
            yesterday


















            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f469754%2fhow-do-i-fit-a-resonance-curve%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            getting Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender working in the command lineHow to connect to CheckPoint VPN on Ubuntu 18.04LTS?Will the Linux ( red-hat ) Open VPNC Client connect to checkpoint or nortel VPN gateways?VPN client for linux machine + support checkpoint gatewayVPN SSL Network Extender in FirefoxLinux Checkpoint SNX tool configuration issuesCheck Point - Connect under Linux - snx + OTPSNX VPN Ububuntu 18.XXUsing Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender CLI with certificateVPN with network manager (nm-applet) is not workingWill the Linux ( red-hat ) Open VPNC Client connect to checkpoint or nortel VPN gateways?VPN client for linux machine + support checkpoint gatewayImport VPN config files to NetworkManager from command lineTrouble connecting to VPN using network-manager, while command line worksStart a VPN connection with PPTP protocol on command linestarting a docker service daemon breaks the vpn networkCan't connect to vpn with Network-managerVPN SSL Network Extender in FirefoxUsing Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender CLI with certificate

            Cannot Extend partition with GParted The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) 2019 Community Moderator Election ResultsCan't increase partition size with GParted?GParted doesn't recognize the unallocated space after my current partitionWhat is the best way to add unallocated space located before to Ubuntu 12.04 partition with GParted live?I can't figure out how to extend my Arch home partition into free spaceGparted Linux Mint 18.1 issueTrying to extend but swap partition is showing as Unknown in Gparted, shows proper from fdiskRearrange partitions in gparted to extend a partitionUnable to extend partition even though unallocated space is next to it using GPartedAllocate free space to root partitiongparted: how to merge unallocated space with a partition

            Marilyn Monroe Ny fiainany manokana | Jereo koa | Meny fitetezanafanitarana azy.