0
$\begingroup$

From this biology article (5th page, right column)

They have...

$$1-P_t ≈ 1-(1+s)P_{t+1}+\frac{p_{t+1}^2}{2}$$

and they conclude that...

$$\frac{dP}{dt} ≈ -sP + \frac{P^2}{2}$$

I don't really understand this link. How did they do that?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ What page? ${}{}$ $\endgroup$ – apnorton Feb 8 '14 at 20:08
  • $\begingroup$ @anorton see update at the first line of my post. $\endgroup$ – Remi.b Feb 8 '14 at 20:10
  • $\begingroup$ $P_{t+1}-P_t = -sP_{t+1}+P^2_{t+1}/2$. The left part is "something like" derivative (see numerical approximations of derivative). $\endgroup$ – TZakrevskiy Feb 8 '14 at 20:12
0
$\begingroup$

I think that $1$ is small when compared to $t$, so they read $P_{t+1}$ as $P_t + dP/dt$. The first equation then becomes $$1 - P \approx 1 - (1 + s)(P + dP/dt) + \tfrac{1}{2}(P + dP/dt)^2.$$ Solving this for $dP/dt$ and ignoring the term $(dP/dt)^2$ gives their result.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Actually, the approximation $1\ll t$ is quite irrelevant here and there is no convincing reason to "ignore" $(dP/dt)^2$. $\endgroup$ – Did May 29 '14 at 9:06

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.