MathGroup Archive 2007

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Interpolating arrays

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg83577] Re: Interpolating arrays
  • From: Thomas E Burton <tburton at>
  • Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 05:35:30 -0500 (EST)

By trial and error, I found that I could get a list-valued  
interpolation function by enclosing the abscissa values in braces--in  
your example,

Interpolation[{{{x1}, {a1, b1}},{{x2}, {a2, b2}},...,{{xi}, {ai,  

Here is how I think Interpolation interprets the arguments a1 and b1  
in four variations:

1. {x1, a1, b1}  (* a1 is the ordinate, b1 is its first derivative *)

2. (x1, {a1,b1}}  (* ditto *)

3. {{x1}, a1, b1}  (* {a1, b1} is a list-valued ordinate *)

4. {{x1}, {a1,b1}}  (* ditto*)

5. {{x1}, {{a1,b1}, {c1, d1}}}  (* {a1,b1,c1,d1} is a list-valued  
ordinate *)

Behaviors 2, 3, & 5 differ from what the explanation of Interpolation  
lead me to believe.


> ... Interpolation (according to the doc center) offers to construct  
> an interpolating function given x values and f[x] values in the  
> following format:
> Interpolation[{{x1, f1},{x2, f2},...{xi, fi}...]
> Down a few lines, doc center says: The fi can be lists or arrays of  
> any dimension
> I'm interested in interpolating between 2D geometric points {a, b},  
> and a naive form would be
> p = Interpolation[{{x1, {a1, b1}},{x2, {a2, b2}},...,{xi, {ai,  
> bi}}...}], expecting to get a form where p[x] would return a 2D point.
> Too naive it seems, because it doesn't work. As far as I can  
> determine, it returns only an Interpolation on a. How come? ...

  • Prev by Date: Re: Discrepancy between Integrate and NIntegrate
  • Next by Date: Re: Fast way of checking for perfect squares?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Interpolating arrays
  • Next by thread: Export figures with tooltips