Determine whether the system is linear?
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
$T(x[n]) = ax[n] + b$
$ T(alpha_{1}x_{1}[n] + alpha_{2}x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}ax_{1}[n]+ alpha_{2}ax_{2} [n] +b $
$ alpha_{1}T(x_{1}[n] ) + alpha_{2}T(x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}(ax[n]+b) + alpha_{2}(ax_{2} [n] +b) $
therefore they are not equal so the system is non-linear?
or would it be something like this:
$ T(alpha_{1}x_{1}[n] + alpha_{2}x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}ax_{1}[n]+alpha_{1}b + alpha_{2}ax_{2} [n] + alpha_{2}b $
$ alpha_{1}T(x_{1}[n] ) + alpha_{2}T(x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}(ax[n]+b) + alpha_{2}(ax_{2} [n] +b) $
and therefore they are equal so the system is linear?
homework system-identification
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
$T(x[n]) = ax[n] + b$
$ T(alpha_{1}x_{1}[n] + alpha_{2}x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}ax_{1}[n]+ alpha_{2}ax_{2} [n] +b $
$ alpha_{1}T(x_{1}[n] ) + alpha_{2}T(x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}(ax[n]+b) + alpha_{2}(ax_{2} [n] +b) $
therefore they are not equal so the system is non-linear?
or would it be something like this:
$ T(alpha_{1}x_{1}[n] + alpha_{2}x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}ax_{1}[n]+alpha_{1}b + alpha_{2}ax_{2} [n] + alpha_{2}b $
$ alpha_{1}T(x_{1}[n] ) + alpha_{2}T(x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}(ax[n]+b) + alpha_{2}(ax_{2} [n] +b) $
and therefore they are equal so the system is linear?
homework system-identification
1
This is an example of incrementally linear system.
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 20:04
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
$T(x[n]) = ax[n] + b$
$ T(alpha_{1}x_{1}[n] + alpha_{2}x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}ax_{1}[n]+ alpha_{2}ax_{2} [n] +b $
$ alpha_{1}T(x_{1}[n] ) + alpha_{2}T(x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}(ax[n]+b) + alpha_{2}(ax_{2} [n] +b) $
therefore they are not equal so the system is non-linear?
or would it be something like this:
$ T(alpha_{1}x_{1}[n] + alpha_{2}x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}ax_{1}[n]+alpha_{1}b + alpha_{2}ax_{2} [n] + alpha_{2}b $
$ alpha_{1}T(x_{1}[n] ) + alpha_{2}T(x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}(ax[n]+b) + alpha_{2}(ax_{2} [n] +b) $
and therefore they are equal so the system is linear?
homework system-identification
$T(x[n]) = ax[n] + b$
$ T(alpha_{1}x_{1}[n] + alpha_{2}x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}ax_{1}[n]+ alpha_{2}ax_{2} [n] +b $
$ alpha_{1}T(x_{1}[n] ) + alpha_{2}T(x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}(ax[n]+b) + alpha_{2}(ax_{2} [n] +b) $
therefore they are not equal so the system is non-linear?
or would it be something like this:
$ T(alpha_{1}x_{1}[n] + alpha_{2}x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}ax_{1}[n]+alpha_{1}b + alpha_{2}ax_{2} [n] + alpha_{2}b $
$ alpha_{1}T(x_{1}[n] ) + alpha_{2}T(x_{2}[n]) = alpha_{1}(ax[n]+b) + alpha_{2}(ax_{2} [n] +b) $
and therefore they are equal so the system is linear?
homework system-identification
homework system-identification
edited Nov 26 at 19:04
asked Nov 26 at 18:49
roffensive
404
404
1
This is an example of incrementally linear system.
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 20:04
add a comment |
1
This is an example of incrementally linear system.
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 20:04
1
1
This is an example of incrementally linear system.
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 20:04
This is an example of incrementally linear system.
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 20:04
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
I don't really understand the motivation behind the second group of equations, or why $b$ gets multiplied by $alpha_i$.
Here, you are using the generic version of the linearity test, which is good, but can raise some doubts, as apparent from your question. You can, in complement, use other simpler tests, that can show that the system is not linear, as a double check. Those are counter-examples. For instance:
- is the output of the zero signal zero? For a linear system , $T(vec{0})=0$.
- is a single output with a zero coefficient zero? This tests if $T(0.vec{x})=0.T(vec{x}) = 0$
- is a single output linear? This tests if $T(alpha.vec{x})=alpha.T(vec{x})$
- is a simple addition linear? This tests if $T(vec{x}+vec{y})=T(vec{x})+T(vec{y})$
Those, if not passed, prove that the system is non-linear. And instead of using the generic version, they can show to your (clever) professor that you have some intuition about what is going on, and the risk of errors is reduced. I personally appreciate a lot when students use minimal arguments: they go straight to the point, spend less time on such questions, to focus on more involved ones.
Of course, if the system is linear, more is required.
Here, your system is non-linear... unless $b=0$.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
Though Laurent gave the standard answer of the linear system. We shall also note that this is an incrementally linear system and it could be made linear by the following argumentation:
Let the first system (your system) be given by the following I/O relationship:
$$ y[n] = mathcal{T}{ x[n] } = a~x[n] + b $$ where $a$ and $b$ are constants.
This system, $mathcal{T}$, is clearly not linear. However if you define the following second system, $mathcal{S}$, as:
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = mathcal{T}{ x[n] - b/a }. $$
Then $mathcal{S}$ will be a linear system as easily demonstrated :
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = mathcal{T}{ x[n] - b/a } = ( x[n] - b/a) cdot a + b = a~x[n]. $$ Hence effectively the second system is
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = a ~x[n] $$ a linear one.
So by this method, you can convert any incrementally linear system to an equivalent linear one. Most typically $b$ can be seen as a bias term that prevented the former system to be linear, and when properly removed the linearity is reclaimed...
Of course, strictly speaking, $S$ is not the same system with $T$, it's another system.
Aren't you trying to prove that a linear system is an affine one without an offet, somehow? :) How would you do with polynomial versions? Horner's rule?
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:21
1
Or probably I'm trying to avoid the term affine ;-) @LaurentDuval
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 22:49
2
That's ah, fine
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:53
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
I don't really understand the motivation behind the second group of equations, or why $b$ gets multiplied by $alpha_i$.
Here, you are using the generic version of the linearity test, which is good, but can raise some doubts, as apparent from your question. You can, in complement, use other simpler tests, that can show that the system is not linear, as a double check. Those are counter-examples. For instance:
- is the output of the zero signal zero? For a linear system , $T(vec{0})=0$.
- is a single output with a zero coefficient zero? This tests if $T(0.vec{x})=0.T(vec{x}) = 0$
- is a single output linear? This tests if $T(alpha.vec{x})=alpha.T(vec{x})$
- is a simple addition linear? This tests if $T(vec{x}+vec{y})=T(vec{x})+T(vec{y})$
Those, if not passed, prove that the system is non-linear. And instead of using the generic version, they can show to your (clever) professor that you have some intuition about what is going on, and the risk of errors is reduced. I personally appreciate a lot when students use minimal arguments: they go straight to the point, spend less time on such questions, to focus on more involved ones.
Of course, if the system is linear, more is required.
Here, your system is non-linear... unless $b=0$.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
I don't really understand the motivation behind the second group of equations, or why $b$ gets multiplied by $alpha_i$.
Here, you are using the generic version of the linearity test, which is good, but can raise some doubts, as apparent from your question. You can, in complement, use other simpler tests, that can show that the system is not linear, as a double check. Those are counter-examples. For instance:
- is the output of the zero signal zero? For a linear system , $T(vec{0})=0$.
- is a single output with a zero coefficient zero? This tests if $T(0.vec{x})=0.T(vec{x}) = 0$
- is a single output linear? This tests if $T(alpha.vec{x})=alpha.T(vec{x})$
- is a simple addition linear? This tests if $T(vec{x}+vec{y})=T(vec{x})+T(vec{y})$
Those, if not passed, prove that the system is non-linear. And instead of using the generic version, they can show to your (clever) professor that you have some intuition about what is going on, and the risk of errors is reduced. I personally appreciate a lot when students use minimal arguments: they go straight to the point, spend less time on such questions, to focus on more involved ones.
Of course, if the system is linear, more is required.
Here, your system is non-linear... unless $b=0$.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
I don't really understand the motivation behind the second group of equations, or why $b$ gets multiplied by $alpha_i$.
Here, you are using the generic version of the linearity test, which is good, but can raise some doubts, as apparent from your question. You can, in complement, use other simpler tests, that can show that the system is not linear, as a double check. Those are counter-examples. For instance:
- is the output of the zero signal zero? For a linear system , $T(vec{0})=0$.
- is a single output with a zero coefficient zero? This tests if $T(0.vec{x})=0.T(vec{x}) = 0$
- is a single output linear? This tests if $T(alpha.vec{x})=alpha.T(vec{x})$
- is a simple addition linear? This tests if $T(vec{x}+vec{y})=T(vec{x})+T(vec{y})$
Those, if not passed, prove that the system is non-linear. And instead of using the generic version, they can show to your (clever) professor that you have some intuition about what is going on, and the risk of errors is reduced. I personally appreciate a lot when students use minimal arguments: they go straight to the point, spend less time on such questions, to focus on more involved ones.
Of course, if the system is linear, more is required.
Here, your system is non-linear... unless $b=0$.
I don't really understand the motivation behind the second group of equations, or why $b$ gets multiplied by $alpha_i$.
Here, you are using the generic version of the linearity test, which is good, but can raise some doubts, as apparent from your question. You can, in complement, use other simpler tests, that can show that the system is not linear, as a double check. Those are counter-examples. For instance:
- is the output of the zero signal zero? For a linear system , $T(vec{0})=0$.
- is a single output with a zero coefficient zero? This tests if $T(0.vec{x})=0.T(vec{x}) = 0$
- is a single output linear? This tests if $T(alpha.vec{x})=alpha.T(vec{x})$
- is a simple addition linear? This tests if $T(vec{x}+vec{y})=T(vec{x})+T(vec{y})$
Those, if not passed, prove that the system is non-linear. And instead of using the generic version, they can show to your (clever) professor that you have some intuition about what is going on, and the risk of errors is reduced. I personally appreciate a lot when students use minimal arguments: they go straight to the point, spend less time on such questions, to focus on more involved ones.
Of course, if the system is linear, more is required.
Here, your system is non-linear... unless $b=0$.
edited Nov 26 at 22:57
answered Nov 26 at 19:11
Laurent Duval
16.1k32058
16.1k32058
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
Though Laurent gave the standard answer of the linear system. We shall also note that this is an incrementally linear system and it could be made linear by the following argumentation:
Let the first system (your system) be given by the following I/O relationship:
$$ y[n] = mathcal{T}{ x[n] } = a~x[n] + b $$ where $a$ and $b$ are constants.
This system, $mathcal{T}$, is clearly not linear. However if you define the following second system, $mathcal{S}$, as:
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = mathcal{T}{ x[n] - b/a }. $$
Then $mathcal{S}$ will be a linear system as easily demonstrated :
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = mathcal{T}{ x[n] - b/a } = ( x[n] - b/a) cdot a + b = a~x[n]. $$ Hence effectively the second system is
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = a ~x[n] $$ a linear one.
So by this method, you can convert any incrementally linear system to an equivalent linear one. Most typically $b$ can be seen as a bias term that prevented the former system to be linear, and when properly removed the linearity is reclaimed...
Of course, strictly speaking, $S$ is not the same system with $T$, it's another system.
Aren't you trying to prove that a linear system is an affine one without an offet, somehow? :) How would you do with polynomial versions? Horner's rule?
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:21
1
Or probably I'm trying to avoid the term affine ;-) @LaurentDuval
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 22:49
2
That's ah, fine
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:53
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
Though Laurent gave the standard answer of the linear system. We shall also note that this is an incrementally linear system and it could be made linear by the following argumentation:
Let the first system (your system) be given by the following I/O relationship:
$$ y[n] = mathcal{T}{ x[n] } = a~x[n] + b $$ where $a$ and $b$ are constants.
This system, $mathcal{T}$, is clearly not linear. However if you define the following second system, $mathcal{S}$, as:
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = mathcal{T}{ x[n] - b/a }. $$
Then $mathcal{S}$ will be a linear system as easily demonstrated :
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = mathcal{T}{ x[n] - b/a } = ( x[n] - b/a) cdot a + b = a~x[n]. $$ Hence effectively the second system is
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = a ~x[n] $$ a linear one.
So by this method, you can convert any incrementally linear system to an equivalent linear one. Most typically $b$ can be seen as a bias term that prevented the former system to be linear, and when properly removed the linearity is reclaimed...
Of course, strictly speaking, $S$ is not the same system with $T$, it's another system.
Aren't you trying to prove that a linear system is an affine one without an offet, somehow? :) How would you do with polynomial versions? Horner's rule?
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:21
1
Or probably I'm trying to avoid the term affine ;-) @LaurentDuval
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 22:49
2
That's ah, fine
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:53
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Though Laurent gave the standard answer of the linear system. We shall also note that this is an incrementally linear system and it could be made linear by the following argumentation:
Let the first system (your system) be given by the following I/O relationship:
$$ y[n] = mathcal{T}{ x[n] } = a~x[n] + b $$ where $a$ and $b$ are constants.
This system, $mathcal{T}$, is clearly not linear. However if you define the following second system, $mathcal{S}$, as:
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = mathcal{T}{ x[n] - b/a }. $$
Then $mathcal{S}$ will be a linear system as easily demonstrated :
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = mathcal{T}{ x[n] - b/a } = ( x[n] - b/a) cdot a + b = a~x[n]. $$ Hence effectively the second system is
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = a ~x[n] $$ a linear one.
So by this method, you can convert any incrementally linear system to an equivalent linear one. Most typically $b$ can be seen as a bias term that prevented the former system to be linear, and when properly removed the linearity is reclaimed...
Of course, strictly speaking, $S$ is not the same system with $T$, it's another system.
Though Laurent gave the standard answer of the linear system. We shall also note that this is an incrementally linear system and it could be made linear by the following argumentation:
Let the first system (your system) be given by the following I/O relationship:
$$ y[n] = mathcal{T}{ x[n] } = a~x[n] + b $$ where $a$ and $b$ are constants.
This system, $mathcal{T}$, is clearly not linear. However if you define the following second system, $mathcal{S}$, as:
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = mathcal{T}{ x[n] - b/a }. $$
Then $mathcal{S}$ will be a linear system as easily demonstrated :
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = mathcal{T}{ x[n] - b/a } = ( x[n] - b/a) cdot a + b = a~x[n]. $$ Hence effectively the second system is
$$ y[n] = mathcal{S}{ x[n] } = a ~x[n] $$ a linear one.
So by this method, you can convert any incrementally linear system to an equivalent linear one. Most typically $b$ can be seen as a bias term that prevented the former system to be linear, and when properly removed the linearity is reclaimed...
Of course, strictly speaking, $S$ is not the same system with $T$, it's another system.
answered Nov 26 at 20:15
Fat32
14k31128
14k31128
Aren't you trying to prove that a linear system is an affine one without an offet, somehow? :) How would you do with polynomial versions? Horner's rule?
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:21
1
Or probably I'm trying to avoid the term affine ;-) @LaurentDuval
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 22:49
2
That's ah, fine
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:53
add a comment |
Aren't you trying to prove that a linear system is an affine one without an offet, somehow? :) How would you do with polynomial versions? Horner's rule?
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:21
1
Or probably I'm trying to avoid the term affine ;-) @LaurentDuval
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 22:49
2
That's ah, fine
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:53
Aren't you trying to prove that a linear system is an affine one without an offet, somehow? :) How would you do with polynomial versions? Horner's rule?
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:21
Aren't you trying to prove that a linear system is an affine one without an offet, somehow? :) How would you do with polynomial versions? Horner's rule?
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:21
1
1
Or probably I'm trying to avoid the term affine ;-) @LaurentDuval
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 22:49
Or probably I'm trying to avoid the term affine ;-) @LaurentDuval
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 22:49
2
2
That's ah, fine
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:53
That's ah, fine
– Laurent Duval
Nov 26 at 22:53
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Signal Processing 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.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- 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.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdsp.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f53672%2fdetermine-whether-the-system-is-linear%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
1
This is an example of incrementally linear system.
– Fat32
Nov 26 at 20:04