Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Mathematics/2015 February 12

Mathematics desk
< February 11 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 13 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Mathematics Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


February 12

edit

Diffusion of innovations: logit or probit?

edit

For the diffusion of innovations scenarios to which Rogers' model is applicable, does innovation utilization where possible (e.g. Bernoulli trial = IP request, success = IPv6 request) empirically follow a logit model or probit model more closely? Does the choice of curve change when a non-negligible number of users revert from the innovation to the previous technology (e.g. IPv6 to IPv4) compared to when they don't (e.g. electric lighting to oil lamps)? NeonMerlin 02:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect a rigorous answer would constitute WP:OR, and might even be publishable :) That being said, probit is just a limiting case of logit. So you have to ask yourself: is there anything intrinsic that requires strictly discrete outputs? If you do a logistic fit, the data will tell you how steep the switching is. If it's very steep, then a probit is likely just as good, and may have some benefits in terms of further analyses available or computation time needed to fit. SemanticMantis (talk) 15:15, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

peculiar integer factorization

edit

Hello, I've been playing around with maxima and noticed that  . Two of the factors are suspiciously close to powers of 10. Is this part of a pattern? Is this significant? Robinh (talk) 08:05, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More generally, x60+1=(x4+1)(x8-x4+1)(x16-x12-x8-x4+1)(x32+x28-x20-x16-x12+x4+1). 104+1 = 73⋅137 and 1016-1012-108-104+1 = 1676321⋅5964848081 is where the other factors come in. Cyclotomic polynomial has related information. --RDBury (talk) 09:41, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some computer algebra systems can do the work for you. Using the free PARI/GP, just start the program with gp.exe, enter factor(x^60+1) and you immediately get:
[                                   x^4 + 1 1]

[                             x^8 - x^4 + 1 1]

[               x^16 - x^12 + x^8 - x^4 + 1 1]

[x^32 + x^28 - x^20 - x^16 - x^12 + x^4 + 1 1]
The "1" at the end is the power of the factor. [x^4 + 1 2] would have meant (x^4 + 1)^2. Wolfram Alpha at http://www.wolframalpha.com/ can do it online. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:28, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, all 4 factors are prime for x = 2, 46, 91872, 132930, 136054, 265512, 638798, 744168, ... PrimeHunter (talk) 14:47, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(OP) This also explains the observation that there are "too many" nines and zeros and ones in the two factors. thanks! Robinh (talk) 20:10, 12 February 2015 (UTC) [reply]
  Resolved