Decomposing a binary function, into (1) a continuous function and (2) a thresholding function.

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose $f$ is an arbitrary binary function and it is given to us:
$$
f: mathbbR^d rightarrow 0, 1
$$
Prove that it is always possible to write this function, as a composition of two functions:
- A continuous function: $g: mathbbR^d rightarrow (0, 1) $
- A thresholding function: $h: (0, 1) rightarrow 0, 1$, e.g. $h(x) = 0.5 + 0.5 sgn(x - 0.5)$
such that: $ forall X in mathbbR^d : ; ; ; f(x) = h(g(x))$.
If there is any requirement needed to have such decomposition, please state it.
real-analysis functional-analysis functions function-and-relation-composition
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose $f$ is an arbitrary binary function and it is given to us:
$$
f: mathbbR^d rightarrow 0, 1
$$
Prove that it is always possible to write this function, as a composition of two functions:
- A continuous function: $g: mathbbR^d rightarrow (0, 1) $
- A thresholding function: $h: (0, 1) rightarrow 0, 1$, e.g. $h(x) = 0.5 + 0.5 sgn(x - 0.5)$
such that: $ forall X in mathbbR^d : ; ; ; f(x) = h(g(x))$.
If there is any requirement needed to have such decomposition, please state it.
real-analysis functional-analysis functions function-and-relation-composition
I'm assuming that the shareholding function is a function with a single step? That is all values above the threshold are 1 and all values below are 0?
â Q the Platypus
Aug 31 at 0:28
yeah, I have given an example.
â Daniel
Aug 31 at 1:44
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose $f$ is an arbitrary binary function and it is given to us:
$$
f: mathbbR^d rightarrow 0, 1
$$
Prove that it is always possible to write this function, as a composition of two functions:
- A continuous function: $g: mathbbR^d rightarrow (0, 1) $
- A thresholding function: $h: (0, 1) rightarrow 0, 1$, e.g. $h(x) = 0.5 + 0.5 sgn(x - 0.5)$
such that: $ forall X in mathbbR^d : ; ; ; f(x) = h(g(x))$.
If there is any requirement needed to have such decomposition, please state it.
real-analysis functional-analysis functions function-and-relation-composition
Suppose $f$ is an arbitrary binary function and it is given to us:
$$
f: mathbbR^d rightarrow 0, 1
$$
Prove that it is always possible to write this function, as a composition of two functions:
- A continuous function: $g: mathbbR^d rightarrow (0, 1) $
- A thresholding function: $h: (0, 1) rightarrow 0, 1$, e.g. $h(x) = 0.5 + 0.5 sgn(x - 0.5)$
such that: $ forall X in mathbbR^d : ; ; ; f(x) = h(g(x))$.
If there is any requirement needed to have such decomposition, please state it.
real-analysis functional-analysis functions function-and-relation-composition
real-analysis functional-analysis functions function-and-relation-composition
edited Aug 31 at 1:44
asked Aug 30 at 23:54
Daniel
1,104921
1,104921
I'm assuming that the shareholding function is a function with a single step? That is all values above the threshold are 1 and all values below are 0?
â Q the Platypus
Aug 31 at 0:28
yeah, I have given an example.
â Daniel
Aug 31 at 1:44
add a comment |Â
I'm assuming that the shareholding function is a function with a single step? That is all values above the threshold are 1 and all values below are 0?
â Q the Platypus
Aug 31 at 0:28
yeah, I have given an example.
â Daniel
Aug 31 at 1:44
I'm assuming that the shareholding function is a function with a single step? That is all values above the threshold are 1 and all values below are 0?
â Q the Platypus
Aug 31 at 0:28
I'm assuming that the shareholding function is a function with a single step? That is all values above the threshold are 1 and all values below are 0?
â Q the Platypus
Aug 31 at 0:28
yeah, I have given an example.
â Daniel
Aug 31 at 1:44
yeah, I have given an example.
â Daniel
Aug 31 at 1:44
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Let's say the threshold is $t$, and that $h(x)=1$ when $x> t$ and $h(x)=0$ when $xle t$. The other possibility is to have $h(x)=1$ for $xge t$ instead, I will deal with this at the end.
If $f=hcirc g$, then $f^-1(1)=g^-1(h^-1(1))=g^-1((t,1))$. Since $g$ is continuous and $(t,1)$ is open, this implies $f^-1(1)$ is an open set. This gives a necessary condition for the decomposition to exist; $f^-1(1)$ must be open.
This condition is also sufficient. If $f^-1(1)$ is open, then $C:= f^-1(0)$ is closed. Let $d:mathbb R^nto mathbb R$ be defined by
$$
d(x)= textdist(x,C)=inf_cin C|x-c|
$$
Since $C$ is closed, it follows $d(x)=0$ if and only if $xin C$. Therefore, letting $$g(x)=frac12 + frac12cdot fracd(x)1+d(x),$$
then $g(x)=frac12$ when $xin C$, while $g(x)>frac12$ when $xnotin C$. This means that letting $h(x)=1$ when $x>frac12$ and $h(x)=0$ when $xle frac12$, then $f=hcirc g$.
If you use the other type of threshold function, where $h(x)=1$ for $xge t$, then you instead get the necessary condition that $f^-1(1)$ must be closed, but otherwise the same logic works. That is, the condition you need is that $f^-1(1)$ is either open or closed.
Can one say that, if $f$ is Riemann integrable, then it would satisfy such decomposition? (i.e. does Riemann integrablity entail the open/clsoed argument you mentioned?)
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 20:23
No. For example, let $$ f(x) = begincases1 & 0le x <1 \ 0 &textotherwise endcases $$ Then $f$ is Riemann integrable, but $f$ cannot be decomposed the way you want it. Note $f^-1(1)=[0,1)$ is neither open nor closed.
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 20:36
I see that's a good point.
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
One more question: does this decomposition always result in a Lipschitz construction? I.e. is it possible to prove that your refined $g(x)$ is Lipschitz? (i.e. has finite derivative).
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
Yes, $g(x)$ is always Lipschitz, with constant $1/2$. This follows because $d(x)$ is $1$-Lipschitz, which can be proved using the triangle inequality (exercise left to reader).
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 21:23
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Let's say the threshold is $t$, and that $h(x)=1$ when $x> t$ and $h(x)=0$ when $xle t$. The other possibility is to have $h(x)=1$ for $xge t$ instead, I will deal with this at the end.
If $f=hcirc g$, then $f^-1(1)=g^-1(h^-1(1))=g^-1((t,1))$. Since $g$ is continuous and $(t,1)$ is open, this implies $f^-1(1)$ is an open set. This gives a necessary condition for the decomposition to exist; $f^-1(1)$ must be open.
This condition is also sufficient. If $f^-1(1)$ is open, then $C:= f^-1(0)$ is closed. Let $d:mathbb R^nto mathbb R$ be defined by
$$
d(x)= textdist(x,C)=inf_cin C|x-c|
$$
Since $C$ is closed, it follows $d(x)=0$ if and only if $xin C$. Therefore, letting $$g(x)=frac12 + frac12cdot fracd(x)1+d(x),$$
then $g(x)=frac12$ when $xin C$, while $g(x)>frac12$ when $xnotin C$. This means that letting $h(x)=1$ when $x>frac12$ and $h(x)=0$ when $xle frac12$, then $f=hcirc g$.
If you use the other type of threshold function, where $h(x)=1$ for $xge t$, then you instead get the necessary condition that $f^-1(1)$ must be closed, but otherwise the same logic works. That is, the condition you need is that $f^-1(1)$ is either open or closed.
Can one say that, if $f$ is Riemann integrable, then it would satisfy such decomposition? (i.e. does Riemann integrablity entail the open/clsoed argument you mentioned?)
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 20:23
No. For example, let $$ f(x) = begincases1 & 0le x <1 \ 0 &textotherwise endcases $$ Then $f$ is Riemann integrable, but $f$ cannot be decomposed the way you want it. Note $f^-1(1)=[0,1)$ is neither open nor closed.
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 20:36
I see that's a good point.
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
One more question: does this decomposition always result in a Lipschitz construction? I.e. is it possible to prove that your refined $g(x)$ is Lipschitz? (i.e. has finite derivative).
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
Yes, $g(x)$ is always Lipschitz, with constant $1/2$. This follows because $d(x)$ is $1$-Lipschitz, which can be proved using the triangle inequality (exercise left to reader).
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 21:23
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Let's say the threshold is $t$, and that $h(x)=1$ when $x> t$ and $h(x)=0$ when $xle t$. The other possibility is to have $h(x)=1$ for $xge t$ instead, I will deal with this at the end.
If $f=hcirc g$, then $f^-1(1)=g^-1(h^-1(1))=g^-1((t,1))$. Since $g$ is continuous and $(t,1)$ is open, this implies $f^-1(1)$ is an open set. This gives a necessary condition for the decomposition to exist; $f^-1(1)$ must be open.
This condition is also sufficient. If $f^-1(1)$ is open, then $C:= f^-1(0)$ is closed. Let $d:mathbb R^nto mathbb R$ be defined by
$$
d(x)= textdist(x,C)=inf_cin C|x-c|
$$
Since $C$ is closed, it follows $d(x)=0$ if and only if $xin C$. Therefore, letting $$g(x)=frac12 + frac12cdot fracd(x)1+d(x),$$
then $g(x)=frac12$ when $xin C$, while $g(x)>frac12$ when $xnotin C$. This means that letting $h(x)=1$ when $x>frac12$ and $h(x)=0$ when $xle frac12$, then $f=hcirc g$.
If you use the other type of threshold function, where $h(x)=1$ for $xge t$, then you instead get the necessary condition that $f^-1(1)$ must be closed, but otherwise the same logic works. That is, the condition you need is that $f^-1(1)$ is either open or closed.
Can one say that, if $f$ is Riemann integrable, then it would satisfy such decomposition? (i.e. does Riemann integrablity entail the open/clsoed argument you mentioned?)
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 20:23
No. For example, let $$ f(x) = begincases1 & 0le x <1 \ 0 &textotherwise endcases $$ Then $f$ is Riemann integrable, but $f$ cannot be decomposed the way you want it. Note $f^-1(1)=[0,1)$ is neither open nor closed.
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 20:36
I see that's a good point.
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
One more question: does this decomposition always result in a Lipschitz construction? I.e. is it possible to prove that your refined $g(x)$ is Lipschitz? (i.e. has finite derivative).
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
Yes, $g(x)$ is always Lipschitz, with constant $1/2$. This follows because $d(x)$ is $1$-Lipschitz, which can be proved using the triangle inequality (exercise left to reader).
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 21:23
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Let's say the threshold is $t$, and that $h(x)=1$ when $x> t$ and $h(x)=0$ when $xle t$. The other possibility is to have $h(x)=1$ for $xge t$ instead, I will deal with this at the end.
If $f=hcirc g$, then $f^-1(1)=g^-1(h^-1(1))=g^-1((t,1))$. Since $g$ is continuous and $(t,1)$ is open, this implies $f^-1(1)$ is an open set. This gives a necessary condition for the decomposition to exist; $f^-1(1)$ must be open.
This condition is also sufficient. If $f^-1(1)$ is open, then $C:= f^-1(0)$ is closed. Let $d:mathbb R^nto mathbb R$ be defined by
$$
d(x)= textdist(x,C)=inf_cin C|x-c|
$$
Since $C$ is closed, it follows $d(x)=0$ if and only if $xin C$. Therefore, letting $$g(x)=frac12 + frac12cdot fracd(x)1+d(x),$$
then $g(x)=frac12$ when $xin C$, while $g(x)>frac12$ when $xnotin C$. This means that letting $h(x)=1$ when $x>frac12$ and $h(x)=0$ when $xle frac12$, then $f=hcirc g$.
If you use the other type of threshold function, where $h(x)=1$ for $xge t$, then you instead get the necessary condition that $f^-1(1)$ must be closed, but otherwise the same logic works. That is, the condition you need is that $f^-1(1)$ is either open or closed.
Let's say the threshold is $t$, and that $h(x)=1$ when $x> t$ and $h(x)=0$ when $xle t$. The other possibility is to have $h(x)=1$ for $xge t$ instead, I will deal with this at the end.
If $f=hcirc g$, then $f^-1(1)=g^-1(h^-1(1))=g^-1((t,1))$. Since $g$ is continuous and $(t,1)$ is open, this implies $f^-1(1)$ is an open set. This gives a necessary condition for the decomposition to exist; $f^-1(1)$ must be open.
This condition is also sufficient. If $f^-1(1)$ is open, then $C:= f^-1(0)$ is closed. Let $d:mathbb R^nto mathbb R$ be defined by
$$
d(x)= textdist(x,C)=inf_cin C|x-c|
$$
Since $C$ is closed, it follows $d(x)=0$ if and only if $xin C$. Therefore, letting $$g(x)=frac12 + frac12cdot fracd(x)1+d(x),$$
then $g(x)=frac12$ when $xin C$, while $g(x)>frac12$ when $xnotin C$. This means that letting $h(x)=1$ when $x>frac12$ and $h(x)=0$ when $xle frac12$, then $f=hcirc g$.
If you use the other type of threshold function, where $h(x)=1$ for $xge t$, then you instead get the necessary condition that $f^-1(1)$ must be closed, but otherwise the same logic works. That is, the condition you need is that $f^-1(1)$ is either open or closed.
answered Sep 1 at 16:59
Mike Earnest
18.1k11850
18.1k11850
Can one say that, if $f$ is Riemann integrable, then it would satisfy such decomposition? (i.e. does Riemann integrablity entail the open/clsoed argument you mentioned?)
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 20:23
No. For example, let $$ f(x) = begincases1 & 0le x <1 \ 0 &textotherwise endcases $$ Then $f$ is Riemann integrable, but $f$ cannot be decomposed the way you want it. Note $f^-1(1)=[0,1)$ is neither open nor closed.
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 20:36
I see that's a good point.
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
One more question: does this decomposition always result in a Lipschitz construction? I.e. is it possible to prove that your refined $g(x)$ is Lipschitz? (i.e. has finite derivative).
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
Yes, $g(x)$ is always Lipschitz, with constant $1/2$. This follows because $d(x)$ is $1$-Lipschitz, which can be proved using the triangle inequality (exercise left to reader).
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 21:23
add a comment |Â
Can one say that, if $f$ is Riemann integrable, then it would satisfy such decomposition? (i.e. does Riemann integrablity entail the open/clsoed argument you mentioned?)
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 20:23
No. For example, let $$ f(x) = begincases1 & 0le x <1 \ 0 &textotherwise endcases $$ Then $f$ is Riemann integrable, but $f$ cannot be decomposed the way you want it. Note $f^-1(1)=[0,1)$ is neither open nor closed.
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 20:36
I see that's a good point.
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
One more question: does this decomposition always result in a Lipschitz construction? I.e. is it possible to prove that your refined $g(x)$ is Lipschitz? (i.e. has finite derivative).
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
Yes, $g(x)$ is always Lipschitz, with constant $1/2$. This follows because $d(x)$ is $1$-Lipschitz, which can be proved using the triangle inequality (exercise left to reader).
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 21:23
Can one say that, if $f$ is Riemann integrable, then it would satisfy such decomposition? (i.e. does Riemann integrablity entail the open/clsoed argument you mentioned?)
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 20:23
Can one say that, if $f$ is Riemann integrable, then it would satisfy such decomposition? (i.e. does Riemann integrablity entail the open/clsoed argument you mentioned?)
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 20:23
No. For example, let $$ f(x) = begincases1 & 0le x <1 \ 0 &textotherwise endcases $$ Then $f$ is Riemann integrable, but $f$ cannot be decomposed the way you want it. Note $f^-1(1)=[0,1)$ is neither open nor closed.
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 20:36
No. For example, let $$ f(x) = begincases1 & 0le x <1 \ 0 &textotherwise endcases $$ Then $f$ is Riemann integrable, but $f$ cannot be decomposed the way you want it. Note $f^-1(1)=[0,1)$ is neither open nor closed.
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 20:36
I see that's a good point.
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
I see that's a good point.
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
One more question: does this decomposition always result in a Lipschitz construction? I.e. is it possible to prove that your refined $g(x)$ is Lipschitz? (i.e. has finite derivative).
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
One more question: does this decomposition always result in a Lipschitz construction? I.e. is it possible to prove that your refined $g(x)$ is Lipschitz? (i.e. has finite derivative).
â Daniel
Sep 1 at 21:17
Yes, $g(x)$ is always Lipschitz, with constant $1/2$. This follows because $d(x)$ is $1$-Lipschitz, which can be proved using the triangle inequality (exercise left to reader).
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 21:23
Yes, $g(x)$ is always Lipschitz, with constant $1/2$. This follows because $d(x)$ is $1$-Lipschitz, which can be proved using the triangle inequality (exercise left to reader).
â Mike Earnest
Sep 1 at 21:23
add a comment |Â
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
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2900147%2fdecomposing-a-binary-function-into-1-a-continuous-function-and-2-a-threshol%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
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
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
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
I'm assuming that the shareholding function is a function with a single step? That is all values above the threshold are 1 and all values below are 0?
â Q the Platypus
Aug 31 at 0:28
yeah, I have given an example.
â Daniel
Aug 31 at 1:44