Practical problems with correlation dimension

Doktor DynaSoar targeting at OMCL.mil
Thu Jan 22 03:56:37 EST 2004


On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:38:40 GMT, "k p  Collins"
<kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net>, apparently tired of ranting to
those as cognitively diverse as he, chose to annoy newsgroups
typically free of idiocy like his, with:

} "Karl" <karlknoblich at yahoo.de> wrote in message
} news:235b9607.0401210500.3ebedda5 at posting.google.com...
} > Hallo!
} >
} > I want to calculate the correlation dimension of a time serie.
} >
} > What I have done
} > I calculated the correlation integral C(r) (number of point having a
} > distance smaller than r) for different embedding dimensions. Taking
} > the slopes of the curve of log C(r) against log r for the different
} > embedding dimensions and plotting them against the embedding dimension
} > should result in a limes of the slopes: the correlation dimension.
} >
} > My problem
} > Which slope shall I take?
} >
} > In examples I saw in text books there is a nice limit of the slopes
} > with higher embedding dimensions. In my data I do not know which slope
} > I should take because the slope of the curve varies. If I take the
} > slope at a certain value of log r I can not get a limes.
} >
} > My curves (log C(r) against log r) can be seen in
} > http://karlknoblich.4t.com/korrdim.jpg
} >
} >
} > What to do? Does anybody knows such data and how to handle it?
} >
} > Hope somebody can help!
} >
} > Karl
} 
} What I will say has not yet been accepted by others,

That's because you're about to prove to everyone not already aware of
the fact that you're a complete moron. Watch:

} You're missing some crucial data that cross-correlates
} your 'time' series to the cerebellar topology.

I couldn't possibly add anything to prove the point better.

Please keep your imaginary mathematical pollution confined to your
"consciousness" groups, although alt.usenet.kooks could use your
input.




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list