5
$\begingroup$

I have the following equation system:

$A_1 x + B_1 y + C_1 z + D_1 xy + E_1 xz + F_1 yz + G_1 xyz = M_1$ $A_2 x + B_2 y + C_2 z + D_2 xy + E_2 xz + F_2 yz + G_2 xyz = M_2$ $A_3 x + B_3 y + C_3 z + D_3 xy + E_3 xz + F_3 yz + G_3 xyz = M_3$

$A_1$, $B_1$, ..., $M_1$, $A_2$, $B_2$, ..., $M_2$, $A_3$, $B_3$, ..., $M_3$ are known.

Trying to get $x$ based on $y$ and $z$ from the first equation, then substituting it in the second equation, then getting $y$ based on $z$ and substituting it in the third equasion seems a nightmare. How to solve this equation system?

$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Where did you find this question? If I may ask. $\endgroup$
    – Julien
    Feb 16 '13 at 14:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think we need to know more about the coefficients. As far as I know, there isn't a general solution to this type of equation system. $\endgroup$
    – Flavin
    Feb 16 '13 at 14:47
  • $\begingroup$ It's part of another problem I'm working on. See my another question: math.stackexchange.com/questions/305395/… $\endgroup$
    – Tamás Pap
    Feb 16 '13 at 15:02
  • $\begingroup$ @Flavin: The problem is that to solve my actual problem I have to be able to solve it without knowing the coefficients. Actually this is related to another problem: math.stackexchange.com/questions/305395/… $\endgroup$
    – Tamás Pap
    Feb 16 '13 at 15:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @vonbrand: Big thanks for the edit! $\endgroup$
    – Tamás Pap
    Feb 16 '13 at 15:22
1
$\begingroup$

A general cubic system of three equations in three unknown has at most 27 solutions. This can be proved by reducing it to a 27 degree polynomial equation in one variable and apply Gauss theorem. Finding the polynomial give you full control of the number of solutions. However, there is a problem with this scheme since it the polynomial of such high degree might be numerically unstable. Another method is Newtons Raphsons method which will give you a numerical solution of the problem.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ For your particular equation, you will end up with a 10th degree polynomial equation in z, which you solve by a numerical method. Rewrite each of the equations as x(a_i(z)y+b_i(z))=(c_i(z)y+d_i(z)) Multiply by (a_1(z)y+b_1(z)) in equation 2 and 3 and you get (a_i(z)y+b_i(z))(c_1(z)y+c_1(z))=(c_i(z)y+d_i(z))(a_1(z)y+b_1(z)) Rewrite these equation as p_2iy^2+p_1iy+p_0i=0 Eliminate y^2 from these two equations and rewrite K(z)y=H(z) p_2iy^2+p_1iy+p_0i=0 $\endgroup$ Jun 30 '17 at 23:15
  • $\begingroup$ This is a polynomial equation of 10th order. It has therefore at most 10 solutions for z. Use back substitution to first find y and then find x. I recommend you to program this method and use some numerical scheme to solve it. $\endgroup$ Jun 30 '17 at 23:23
  • $\begingroup$ Forget everything after K(z)y=H(z) in my first comment. It was an error due to a not to good interface on math.stackexchange.com. Insert instead: Multiply by K(z)^2 in p_21y^2+p_11y+p_01=0 and use K(z)y=H(z) to eliminate y. You get p_21 H(z)^2+p_11H(z)K(z)+p_01 K(z)^2=0. $\endgroup$ Jun 30 '17 at 23:26
-1
$\begingroup$

A possible workaround can be the following:

  1. Let's multiply the first equation with with $-G_2$, the second equation with $G_1$, and add them.
  2. Now multiply the second equation with $-G_3$, the third one with $G_2$, and add them.
  3. Finally multiply the third equation with $-G_1$, and the first one with $G_3$ and add them.

Theoretically we have now tree new equations, but we escaped from the $xyz$ part.

In the same way let's escape from xy, xz, xz.

We have now a simple equation system with 3 equations and 3 unknowns:

$AA_1x + BB_1y + CC_1z = MM_1$

$AA_2x + BB_2y + CC_2z = MM_2$

$AA_3x + BB_3y + CC_3z = MM_3$

that's easy to solve.

If you think this wouldn't always work please let me know, or if you have a better solution it is welcomed!

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ It will not work. Try to solve with your method the system of equations $x+y+xy=5$ and $x-y+2xy=3$. (Or even more tiny example for meditation: $x+x^{17}=4$.) $\endgroup$
    – zaarcis
    Feb 16 '13 at 19:43
  • $\begingroup$ You are probably right. Can you give an equation system with 3 unknowns similar to system in the question, where this will not work? Thanks! $\endgroup$
    – Tamás Pap
    Feb 16 '13 at 20:23
  • $\begingroup$ If lots of $0$-s as coefficients is okay, then $x+xyz=7$, $y+xyz=8$, $z+xyz=9$. You can't make intended transformations simultaneously, and making them one by one leaves you (before last transformation) with only one equation with $xyz$ - and you can't make $1\cdot k_1 + 0\cdot k_2$ equal to $0$ (if $k_1\neq 0$ and $k_2\neq 0$, of course). It means you can't get rid of all $xyz$-s by such method. $\endgroup$
    – zaarcis
    Feb 16 '13 at 20:31
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah, you are right! Any ideas? $\endgroup$
    – Tamás Pap
    Feb 16 '13 at 20:58
  • $\begingroup$ Use numerical methods to approximate solution. (And no, I can't tell more because I'm weak at them.) $\endgroup$
    – zaarcis
    Feb 17 '13 at 14:30
-1
$\begingroup$

Maybe a bit ambiguous, but you can also try to set up the equations for $M_1+M_2$, $M_1+M_3$, $M_2+M_3$ and $M_1+M_2+M_3$, which is easy, in total you then have 7 equations, with 7 unknowns ($x,y,z,xy,xz,yz,xyz$). But i dont think this is even allowed.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ It's allowed but it will help nothing. It will just make 4 more equations with no new information. $\endgroup$
    – zaarcis
    Feb 17 '13 at 14:34

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.