Prepare for the CompTIA Network+ exam by learning how to troubleshoot, configure, and manage both wired and wireless networks.

Experts:

I need someone to validate (and potentially correct) "math notation" for a formula.

Please see attached XLS which illustrates the process.

Thank you in advance,

EEH

Math-Notation.xls

I need someone to validate (and potentially correct) "math notation" for a formula.

Please see attached XLS which illustrates the process.

Thank you in advance,

EEH

Math-Notation.xls

Do more with

EXPERT OFFICE^{®} is a registered trademark of EXPERTS EXCHANGE^{®}

I think it better to refer to Z_ik as the response by Participant_i about Process_k. You then need to sum Z_ik over both the Participants and Processes. So you need a double summation.

Likewise, you should be referring to MS_ik and m_ik for the Modified Score and Participating rating factor for Participant_i and Process_k

You should also get rid of the asterisk--that's used by Excel formulas to imply multiplication, but isn't really used in mathematical representations.

I wish that the Formula Editor displayed the subscripts closer to the variables.

where:

MS_ik = Modified Score

i = Participant subscript

N= Number of Participants

k = Process subscript

NN = Number of Processes

m_ik = Weighting factor assigned by Participant i for Process k

p_ik = Whether Participant i supports Process k

FormulaQ28104150.doc

N = Number of ParticipantsYour description above is correct

NN = Number of Processes

i = Counter for N

k = Counter for NN

Classical math would use a single letter to represent each variable. You could then use mrsd in an Equation, and everyone would understand that multiplication is required. Had you not already used m for a variable, I'd have suggested M and N for the numbers of Processes and Participants.

Given that we are already using a mix of one and two-letter symbols for variables, you will need to add separation, subscripting, parentheses or asterisks between variables to imply multiplication.

m r s d

m_ikr s d

m_ik(r s d)

where:This is notationally confusing.

MS_ik = Modified Score

i = Participant subscript

N= Number of Participants

k = Process subscript

NN = Number of Processes

m_ik = Weighting factor assigned by Participant i for Process k

p_ik = Whether Participant i supports Process k

Does the i in p_ik represent the i from MS_ik, or does it represent 1,2,...,N in the sum from 1 to N?

In the denominator in your fraction is meant to be a constant total of all p_, that does not depend on which MS_ you are computing, then it may help to make it more obvious by separating that out.

On the other hand, if the p_i sum in the numerator is the same as the p_i sum in the denominator, then it may be notationally clearer to reverse the order of the summations in the denominator so that the sum from 1 to N is inside the sum from 1 to NN

which would allow separating out the sum in the numerator.

## Premium Content

You need an Expert Office subscription to comment.Start Free Trial