Re: Who find a better fit of this experimental data?

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg45661] Re: Who find a better fit of this experimental data?*From*: Bill Rowe <readnewsciv at earthlink.net>*Date*: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 02:34:30 -0500 (EST)*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

On 1/16/04 at 6:05 AM, guillerm at aida.usal.es (Guillermo Sanchez) wrote: > I attach some expemental data. I have fitted them with a biexponential > function, but the fit is not good enough. Who find a better fit of > this experimental data? <data snipped> What defines better? Without a definition of "better fit", your question is too open ended to answer. I assume the data comes from some real set of measurements. Is there a known physical model for whatever process that was measured? If so, try fitting this model to the data. Once you have a fit to the data, what will you do with it? If all you need is to find intermediate values, i.e., interpolate the data you could use Interpolation. Or if you need a smoother model than what Interpolation gives, you could use the routines in Statistics`DataSmoothing` smooth the data then use Interpolation. I can think of many other approaches to modeling using say wavelets, splines, fourier analysis and so on. Which is most suitable depends on what you are trying to do. -- To reply via email subtract one hundred and four