Comment by creata

1 day ago

Sorry if this is a stupid question, but is there a direct link between the choice of weight function and the applications of the polynomial?

Like, is it possible to infer that Chebyshev polynomials would be useful in approximation theory using only the fact that they're orthogonal wrt the Wigner semicircle (U_n) or arcsine (T_n) distribution?

Chebyshev polynomials are useful in approximation theory because they're the minimax polynomials. The remainder of polynomial interpolation can be given in terms of the nodal polynomial, which is the polynomial with the interpolation nodes as zeros. Minimizing the maximum error then leads to the Chebyshev polynomials. This is a basic fact in numerical analysis that has tons of derivations online and in books.

The weight function shows the Chebyshev polynomials' relation to the Fourier series . But they are not what you would usually think of as a good candidate for L2 approximation on the interval. Normally you'd use Legendre polynomials, since they have w = 1, but they are a much less convenient basis than Chebyshev for numerics.

  • True, and there are plenty of other reasons Chebyshev polynomials are convenient, too.

    But I guess what I was asking was: is there some kind of abstract argument why the semicircle distribution would be appropriate in this context?

    For example, you have abstract arguments like the central limit theorem that explain (in some loose sense) why the normal distribution is everywhere.

    I guess the semicircle might more-or-less be the only way to get something where interpolation uses the DFT (by projecting points evenly spaced on the complex unit circle onto [-1, 1]), but I dunno, that motivation feels too many steps removed.

    • If there is, I'm not aware of it. Orthogonal polynomials come up in random matrix theory. Maybe there's something there?

      But your last paragraph is exactly it... it is a "basic" fact but the consequences are profound.

      5 replies →

Yes. Precisely that they are orthogonal means that they are suitable.

If you are familiar with the Fourier series, the same principle can be applied to approximating with polynomials.

In both cases the crucial point is that you can form an orthogonal subspace, onto which you can project the function to be approximated.

For polynomials it is this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynomial_chaos

  • What you're saying isn't wrong, per se, but...

    There are polynomials that aren't orthogonal that are suitable for numerics: both the Bernstein basis and the monomial basis are used very often and neither are orthogonal. (Well, you could pick a weight function that makes them orthogonal, but...!)

    The fact of their orthogonality is crucial, but when you work with Chebyshev polynomials, it is very unlikely you are doing an orthogonal (L2) projection! Instead, you would normally use Chebyshev interpolation: 1) interpolate at either the Type-I or Type-II Chebyshev nodes, 2) use the DCT to compute the Chebyshev series coefficients. The fact that you can do this is related to the weight function, but it isn't an L2 procedure. Like I mentioned in my other post, the Chebyshev weight function is maybe more of an artifact of the Chebyshev polynomials' intimate relation to the Fourier series.

    I am also not totally sure what polynomial chaos has to do with any of this. PC is a term of art in uncertainty quantification, and this is all just basic numerical analysis. If you have a series in orthgonal polynomials, if you want to call it something fancy, you might call it a Fourier series, but usually there is no fancy term...

    • I think you are very confused. My post is about approximation. Obviously other areas use other polynomials or the same polynomials for other reasons.

      In this case it is about the principle of approximation by orthogonal projection, which is quite common in different fields of mathematics. Here you create an approximation of a target by projecting it onto an orthogonal subspace. This is what the Fourier series is about, an orthogonal projection. Choosing e.g. the Chebychev Polynomials instead of the complex exponential gives you an Approximation onto the orthogonal space of e.g. Chebychev polynomials.

      The same principle applies e.g. when you are computing an SVD for a low rank approximation. That is another case of orthogonal projection.

      >Instead, you would normally use Chebyshev interpolation

      What you do not understand is that this is the same thing. The distinction you describe does not exist, these are the same things, just different perspectives. That they are the same easily follows from the uniqueness of polynomials, which are fully determined by their interpolation points. These aren't distinct ideas, there is a greater principle behind them and that you are using some other algorithm to compute the Approximation does not matter at all.

      >I am also not totally sure what polynomial chaos has to do with any of this.

      It is the exact same thing. Projection onto an orthogonal subspace of polynomials. Just that you choose the polynomials with regard to a random variable. So you get an approximation with good statistical properties.

      3 replies →