From 1D gaussian to 2D gaussianCreate Fisheye from imageIs there any way to calculate change in derivatives along a vector?normalized Laplacian of GaussianGet 1d kernel from 2d gaussianHow to define the inverse of a vector?Can gaussian low pass filter remove ringing effect from the image?While calculating the arctan (1.01236) do we have to do 2 steps or one step before Taylor series?Derive the Separability of 2D GaussianDoes a summation of two negative Gaussians with different standard deviations have a stationary point?Iterative gaussian convolution and decimation when the decimation/convolution ratios are not divisible by two?

Quoting Keynes in a lecture

Pre-Employment Background Check With Consent For Future Checks

How do I Interface a PS/2 Keyboard without Modern Techniques?

How much do grades matter for a future academia position?

Can I say "fingers" when referring to toes?

PTIJ: Which Dr. Seuss books should one obtain?

What the heck is gets(stdin) on site coderbyte?

Difference between shutdown options

In One Punch Man, is King actually weak?

Does Doodling or Improvising on the Piano Have Any Benefits?

How to make a list of partial sums using forEach

When is "ei" a diphthong?

Sound waves in different octaves

How do I prevent inappropriate ads from appearing in my game?

What does "tick" mean in this sentence?

How do I fix the group tension caused by my character stealing and possibly killing without provocation?

What is the meaning of the following sentence?

Do people actually use the word "kaputt" in conversation?

Grepping string, but include all non-blank lines following each grep match

How to test the sharpness of a knife?

Giving feedback to someone without sounding prejudiced

Deciphering cause of death?

Has the laser at Magurele, Romania reached a tenth of the Sun's power?

What should be the ideal length of sentences in a blog post for ease of reading?



From 1D gaussian to 2D gaussian


Create Fisheye from imageIs there any way to calculate change in derivatives along a vector?normalized Laplacian of GaussianGet 1d kernel from 2d gaussianHow to define the inverse of a vector?Can gaussian low pass filter remove ringing effect from the image?While calculating the arctan (1.01236) do we have to do 2 steps or one step before Taylor series?Derive the Separability of 2D GaussianDoes a summation of two negative Gaussians with different standard deviations have a stationary point?Iterative gaussian convolution and decimation when the decimation/convolution ratios are not divisible by two?













1












$begingroup$


I read this:




The Gaussian kernel for dimensions higher than one, say N, can be described as a regular product of N one-dimensional kernels. Example:



g2D(x,y,$sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$) = g1D(x,$sigma_1^2$)g2D(y,$sigma_2^2$)




saying that the product of two 1 dimensional gaussian functions with variances $sigma_1^2$ and $sigma_2^2$ is equal to a two dimensional gaussian function with the sum of the two variances as its new variance.



I tried to deduce this by using:



g1D(x,$sigma1^2$)g2D(y,$sigma2^2$) = $frac1sqrt2pisigma_1e^frac-x^22sigma_1^2frac1sqrt2pisigma_2e^frac-y^22sigma_2^2$ = $frac12pisigma_1sigma_2e^-(fracx^22sigma_1^2+fracy^22sigma_2^2)$



but I fail to obtain



$frac12pi(sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2)e^frac-(x^2+y^2)2sigma_1^2 + 2sigma_2^2$



which is equal to g2D(x,y,$sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$).



Someone know how to get there?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$
















    1












    $begingroup$


    I read this:




    The Gaussian kernel for dimensions higher than one, say N, can be described as a regular product of N one-dimensional kernels. Example:



    g2D(x,y,$sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$) = g1D(x,$sigma_1^2$)g2D(y,$sigma_2^2$)




    saying that the product of two 1 dimensional gaussian functions with variances $sigma_1^2$ and $sigma_2^2$ is equal to a two dimensional gaussian function with the sum of the two variances as its new variance.



    I tried to deduce this by using:



    g1D(x,$sigma1^2$)g2D(y,$sigma2^2$) = $frac1sqrt2pisigma_1e^frac-x^22sigma_1^2frac1sqrt2pisigma_2e^frac-y^22sigma_2^2$ = $frac12pisigma_1sigma_2e^-(fracx^22sigma_1^2+fracy^22sigma_2^2)$



    but I fail to obtain



    $frac12pi(sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2)e^frac-(x^2+y^2)2sigma_1^2 + 2sigma_2^2$



    which is equal to g2D(x,y,$sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$).



    Someone know how to get there?










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$














      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$


      I read this:




      The Gaussian kernel for dimensions higher than one, say N, can be described as a regular product of N one-dimensional kernels. Example:



      g2D(x,y,$sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$) = g1D(x,$sigma_1^2$)g2D(y,$sigma_2^2$)




      saying that the product of two 1 dimensional gaussian functions with variances $sigma_1^2$ and $sigma_2^2$ is equal to a two dimensional gaussian function with the sum of the two variances as its new variance.



      I tried to deduce this by using:



      g1D(x,$sigma1^2$)g2D(y,$sigma2^2$) = $frac1sqrt2pisigma_1e^frac-x^22sigma_1^2frac1sqrt2pisigma_2e^frac-y^22sigma_2^2$ = $frac12pisigma_1sigma_2e^-(fracx^22sigma_1^2+fracy^22sigma_2^2)$



      but I fail to obtain



      $frac12pi(sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2)e^frac-(x^2+y^2)2sigma_1^2 + 2sigma_2^2$



      which is equal to g2D(x,y,$sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$).



      Someone know how to get there?










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I read this:




      The Gaussian kernel for dimensions higher than one, say N, can be described as a regular product of N one-dimensional kernels. Example:



      g2D(x,y,$sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$) = g1D(x,$sigma_1^2$)g2D(y,$sigma_2^2$)




      saying that the product of two 1 dimensional gaussian functions with variances $sigma_1^2$ and $sigma_2^2$ is equal to a two dimensional gaussian function with the sum of the two variances as its new variance.



      I tried to deduce this by using:



      g1D(x,$sigma1^2$)g2D(y,$sigma2^2$) = $frac1sqrt2pisigma_1e^frac-x^22sigma_1^2frac1sqrt2pisigma_2e^frac-y^22sigma_2^2$ = $frac12pisigma_1sigma_2e^-(fracx^22sigma_1^2+fracy^22sigma_2^2)$



      but I fail to obtain



      $frac12pi(sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2)e^frac-(x^2+y^2)2sigma_1^2 + 2sigma_2^2$



      which is equal to g2D(x,y,$sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$).



      Someone know how to get there?







      calculus image-processing






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Jul 27 '15 at 13:45









      HerwiegHerwieg

      61




      61




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          -1












          $begingroup$

          Hint: You see in the exponential that we have
          $$ exp left ( - fracx^2 + y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )=exp left ( frac-x^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )exp left ( frac- y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) $$
          The normalization hanging around should be
          $$frac12 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) $$
          as you've seen...but under the change of variables
          $$ z_1 = frac sigma_1xsqrtsigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 quad & quad z_2 = frac sigma_2ysqrtsigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 $$
          What do you obtain? Also note that
          $$ 2 pi = sqrt2pi sqrt2 pi $$
          Edit: We see that
          $$frac12 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR^2 exp left ( - fracx^2 + y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) dxdy = $$
          $$= left[ frac1sqrt2 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracx^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) dx right] left [ frac1sqrt2 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracy^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )dy right]$$
          $$ =left[ frac1sqrt2 pi sigma_1 int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracz_1^2 2 sigma_1^2 right ) dz_1 right] left [ frac1sqrt2 pi sigma_2 int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracz_2^2 2sigma_2^2 right )dz_2 right] $$






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Using your hint still doesn't give me the correct normalization. Preferably, I would like to go from g1d*g1d to g2d and not the other way around. Could you give me the full derivation?
            $endgroup$
            – Herwieg
            Jul 28 '15 at 10:08











          • $begingroup$
            What does $dxdy$ become under the change of coordinates I just suggested ?
            $endgroup$
            – Jeb
            Jul 28 '15 at 11:51










          • $begingroup$
            Also, if you want to go the other direction, just write the change of variables I gave in terms of $z_1,z_2$
            $endgroup$
            – Jeb
            Jul 28 '15 at 11:56










          • $begingroup$
            Why do you ask for dxdy, as there is no integration involved? I'm not able to find out the derivation myself with these hints so it would be great if you could give the full derivation.
            $endgroup$
            – Herwieg
            Jul 28 '15 at 14:06










          • $begingroup$
            Oh, you should re-read your notes...there is implicitly an integral hanging around in that statement...it is literally just the change of variables I've written.
            $endgroup$
            – Jeb
            Jul 28 '15 at 15:08



















          -1












          $begingroup$

          Your first expression,



          $G(x,sigma_1^2) G(y,sigma_2^2) = frac1sqrt2pisigma_1e^frac-x^22sigma_1^2frac1sqrt2pisigma_2e^frac-y^22sigma_2^2$ = $frac12pisigma_1sigma_2e^-(fracx^22sigma_1^2+fracy^22sigma_2^2)$



          is a correct anisotropic 2D Gaussian. The expression you are trying to obtain,



          $frac12pi(sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2)e^frac-(x^2+y^2)2sigma_1^2 + 2sigma_2^2$



          is not (it’s an isotropic Gaussian). There is no way you can go from the one to the other. However, one can incorrectly match the two expressions by creating a new coordinate system that is a scaled version of the original one, in such a way that the Gaussian is isotropic in the new coordinate system. The other answer does this. But that is not useful.



          It seems that OP is confused about the combination of the variances. The convolution of two 1-dimensional Gaussian functions with variances $sigma_1^2$ and $sigma_2^2$ is equal to a 1-dimensional Gaussian function with variance $sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$. There is no such expectation for the multiplication of Gaussians (in fact, when multiplying them, assuming the same orientation and the same mean, the resulting variance is smaller, not larger.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            );
            );
            , "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1375577%2ffrom-1d-gaussian-to-2d-gaussian%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            -1












            $begingroup$

            Hint: You see in the exponential that we have
            $$ exp left ( - fracx^2 + y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )=exp left ( frac-x^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )exp left ( frac- y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) $$
            The normalization hanging around should be
            $$frac12 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) $$
            as you've seen...but under the change of variables
            $$ z_1 = frac sigma_1xsqrtsigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 quad & quad z_2 = frac sigma_2ysqrtsigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 $$
            What do you obtain? Also note that
            $$ 2 pi = sqrt2pi sqrt2 pi $$
            Edit: We see that
            $$frac12 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR^2 exp left ( - fracx^2 + y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) dxdy = $$
            $$= left[ frac1sqrt2 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracx^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) dx right] left [ frac1sqrt2 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracy^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )dy right]$$
            $$ =left[ frac1sqrt2 pi sigma_1 int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracz_1^2 2 sigma_1^2 right ) dz_1 right] left [ frac1sqrt2 pi sigma_2 int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracz_2^2 2sigma_2^2 right )dz_2 right] $$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              Using your hint still doesn't give me the correct normalization. Preferably, I would like to go from g1d*g1d to g2d and not the other way around. Could you give me the full derivation?
              $endgroup$
              – Herwieg
              Jul 28 '15 at 10:08











            • $begingroup$
              What does $dxdy$ become under the change of coordinates I just suggested ?
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 11:51










            • $begingroup$
              Also, if you want to go the other direction, just write the change of variables I gave in terms of $z_1,z_2$
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 11:56










            • $begingroup$
              Why do you ask for dxdy, as there is no integration involved? I'm not able to find out the derivation myself with these hints so it would be great if you could give the full derivation.
              $endgroup$
              – Herwieg
              Jul 28 '15 at 14:06










            • $begingroup$
              Oh, you should re-read your notes...there is implicitly an integral hanging around in that statement...it is literally just the change of variables I've written.
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 15:08
















            -1












            $begingroup$

            Hint: You see in the exponential that we have
            $$ exp left ( - fracx^2 + y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )=exp left ( frac-x^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )exp left ( frac- y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) $$
            The normalization hanging around should be
            $$frac12 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) $$
            as you've seen...but under the change of variables
            $$ z_1 = frac sigma_1xsqrtsigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 quad & quad z_2 = frac sigma_2ysqrtsigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 $$
            What do you obtain? Also note that
            $$ 2 pi = sqrt2pi sqrt2 pi $$
            Edit: We see that
            $$frac12 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR^2 exp left ( - fracx^2 + y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) dxdy = $$
            $$= left[ frac1sqrt2 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracx^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) dx right] left [ frac1sqrt2 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracy^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )dy right]$$
            $$ =left[ frac1sqrt2 pi sigma_1 int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracz_1^2 2 sigma_1^2 right ) dz_1 right] left [ frac1sqrt2 pi sigma_2 int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracz_2^2 2sigma_2^2 right )dz_2 right] $$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              Using your hint still doesn't give me the correct normalization. Preferably, I would like to go from g1d*g1d to g2d and not the other way around. Could you give me the full derivation?
              $endgroup$
              – Herwieg
              Jul 28 '15 at 10:08











            • $begingroup$
              What does $dxdy$ become under the change of coordinates I just suggested ?
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 11:51










            • $begingroup$
              Also, if you want to go the other direction, just write the change of variables I gave in terms of $z_1,z_2$
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 11:56










            • $begingroup$
              Why do you ask for dxdy, as there is no integration involved? I'm not able to find out the derivation myself with these hints so it would be great if you could give the full derivation.
              $endgroup$
              – Herwieg
              Jul 28 '15 at 14:06










            • $begingroup$
              Oh, you should re-read your notes...there is implicitly an integral hanging around in that statement...it is literally just the change of variables I've written.
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 15:08














            -1












            -1








            -1





            $begingroup$

            Hint: You see in the exponential that we have
            $$ exp left ( - fracx^2 + y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )=exp left ( frac-x^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )exp left ( frac- y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) $$
            The normalization hanging around should be
            $$frac12 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) $$
            as you've seen...but under the change of variables
            $$ z_1 = frac sigma_1xsqrtsigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 quad & quad z_2 = frac sigma_2ysqrtsigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 $$
            What do you obtain? Also note that
            $$ 2 pi = sqrt2pi sqrt2 pi $$
            Edit: We see that
            $$frac12 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR^2 exp left ( - fracx^2 + y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) dxdy = $$
            $$= left[ frac1sqrt2 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracx^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) dx right] left [ frac1sqrt2 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracy^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )dy right]$$
            $$ =left[ frac1sqrt2 pi sigma_1 int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracz_1^2 2 sigma_1^2 right ) dz_1 right] left [ frac1sqrt2 pi sigma_2 int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracz_2^2 2sigma_2^2 right )dz_2 right] $$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            Hint: You see in the exponential that we have
            $$ exp left ( - fracx^2 + y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )=exp left ( frac-x^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )exp left ( frac- y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) $$
            The normalization hanging around should be
            $$frac12 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) $$
            as you've seen...but under the change of variables
            $$ z_1 = frac sigma_1xsqrtsigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 quad & quad z_2 = frac sigma_2ysqrtsigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 $$
            What do you obtain? Also note that
            $$ 2 pi = sqrt2pi sqrt2 pi $$
            Edit: We see that
            $$frac12 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR^2 exp left ( - fracx^2 + y^22( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) dxdy = $$
            $$= left[ frac1sqrt2 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracx^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right ) dx right] left [ frac1sqrt2 pi ( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracy^2 2( sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2 ) right )dy right]$$
            $$ =left[ frac1sqrt2 pi sigma_1 int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracz_1^2 2 sigma_1^2 right ) dz_1 right] left [ frac1sqrt2 pi sigma_2 int_mathbbR exp left ( - fracz_2^2 2sigma_2^2 right )dz_2 right] $$







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Jul 28 '15 at 22:52

























            answered Jul 27 '15 at 14:02









            JebJeb

            3,8791813




            3,8791813











            • $begingroup$
              Using your hint still doesn't give me the correct normalization. Preferably, I would like to go from g1d*g1d to g2d and not the other way around. Could you give me the full derivation?
              $endgroup$
              – Herwieg
              Jul 28 '15 at 10:08











            • $begingroup$
              What does $dxdy$ become under the change of coordinates I just suggested ?
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 11:51










            • $begingroup$
              Also, if you want to go the other direction, just write the change of variables I gave in terms of $z_1,z_2$
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 11:56










            • $begingroup$
              Why do you ask for dxdy, as there is no integration involved? I'm not able to find out the derivation myself with these hints so it would be great if you could give the full derivation.
              $endgroup$
              – Herwieg
              Jul 28 '15 at 14:06










            • $begingroup$
              Oh, you should re-read your notes...there is implicitly an integral hanging around in that statement...it is literally just the change of variables I've written.
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 15:08

















            • $begingroup$
              Using your hint still doesn't give me the correct normalization. Preferably, I would like to go from g1d*g1d to g2d and not the other way around. Could you give me the full derivation?
              $endgroup$
              – Herwieg
              Jul 28 '15 at 10:08











            • $begingroup$
              What does $dxdy$ become under the change of coordinates I just suggested ?
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 11:51










            • $begingroup$
              Also, if you want to go the other direction, just write the change of variables I gave in terms of $z_1,z_2$
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 11:56










            • $begingroup$
              Why do you ask for dxdy, as there is no integration involved? I'm not able to find out the derivation myself with these hints so it would be great if you could give the full derivation.
              $endgroup$
              – Herwieg
              Jul 28 '15 at 14:06










            • $begingroup$
              Oh, you should re-read your notes...there is implicitly an integral hanging around in that statement...it is literally just the change of variables I've written.
              $endgroup$
              – Jeb
              Jul 28 '15 at 15:08
















            $begingroup$
            Using your hint still doesn't give me the correct normalization. Preferably, I would like to go from g1d*g1d to g2d and not the other way around. Could you give me the full derivation?
            $endgroup$
            – Herwieg
            Jul 28 '15 at 10:08





            $begingroup$
            Using your hint still doesn't give me the correct normalization. Preferably, I would like to go from g1d*g1d to g2d and not the other way around. Could you give me the full derivation?
            $endgroup$
            – Herwieg
            Jul 28 '15 at 10:08













            $begingroup$
            What does $dxdy$ become under the change of coordinates I just suggested ?
            $endgroup$
            – Jeb
            Jul 28 '15 at 11:51




            $begingroup$
            What does $dxdy$ become under the change of coordinates I just suggested ?
            $endgroup$
            – Jeb
            Jul 28 '15 at 11:51












            $begingroup$
            Also, if you want to go the other direction, just write the change of variables I gave in terms of $z_1,z_2$
            $endgroup$
            – Jeb
            Jul 28 '15 at 11:56




            $begingroup$
            Also, if you want to go the other direction, just write the change of variables I gave in terms of $z_1,z_2$
            $endgroup$
            – Jeb
            Jul 28 '15 at 11:56












            $begingroup$
            Why do you ask for dxdy, as there is no integration involved? I'm not able to find out the derivation myself with these hints so it would be great if you could give the full derivation.
            $endgroup$
            – Herwieg
            Jul 28 '15 at 14:06




            $begingroup$
            Why do you ask for dxdy, as there is no integration involved? I'm not able to find out the derivation myself with these hints so it would be great if you could give the full derivation.
            $endgroup$
            – Herwieg
            Jul 28 '15 at 14:06












            $begingroup$
            Oh, you should re-read your notes...there is implicitly an integral hanging around in that statement...it is literally just the change of variables I've written.
            $endgroup$
            – Jeb
            Jul 28 '15 at 15:08





            $begingroup$
            Oh, you should re-read your notes...there is implicitly an integral hanging around in that statement...it is literally just the change of variables I've written.
            $endgroup$
            – Jeb
            Jul 28 '15 at 15:08












            -1












            $begingroup$

            Your first expression,



            $G(x,sigma_1^2) G(y,sigma_2^2) = frac1sqrt2pisigma_1e^frac-x^22sigma_1^2frac1sqrt2pisigma_2e^frac-y^22sigma_2^2$ = $frac12pisigma_1sigma_2e^-(fracx^22sigma_1^2+fracy^22sigma_2^2)$



            is a correct anisotropic 2D Gaussian. The expression you are trying to obtain,



            $frac12pi(sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2)e^frac-(x^2+y^2)2sigma_1^2 + 2sigma_2^2$



            is not (it’s an isotropic Gaussian). There is no way you can go from the one to the other. However, one can incorrectly match the two expressions by creating a new coordinate system that is a scaled version of the original one, in such a way that the Gaussian is isotropic in the new coordinate system. The other answer does this. But that is not useful.



            It seems that OP is confused about the combination of the variances. The convolution of two 1-dimensional Gaussian functions with variances $sigma_1^2$ and $sigma_2^2$ is equal to a 1-dimensional Gaussian function with variance $sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$. There is no such expectation for the multiplication of Gaussians (in fact, when multiplying them, assuming the same orientation and the same mean, the resulting variance is smaller, not larger.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$

















              -1












              $begingroup$

              Your first expression,



              $G(x,sigma_1^2) G(y,sigma_2^2) = frac1sqrt2pisigma_1e^frac-x^22sigma_1^2frac1sqrt2pisigma_2e^frac-y^22sigma_2^2$ = $frac12pisigma_1sigma_2e^-(fracx^22sigma_1^2+fracy^22sigma_2^2)$



              is a correct anisotropic 2D Gaussian. The expression you are trying to obtain,



              $frac12pi(sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2)e^frac-(x^2+y^2)2sigma_1^2 + 2sigma_2^2$



              is not (it’s an isotropic Gaussian). There is no way you can go from the one to the other. However, one can incorrectly match the two expressions by creating a new coordinate system that is a scaled version of the original one, in such a way that the Gaussian is isotropic in the new coordinate system. The other answer does this. But that is not useful.



              It seems that OP is confused about the combination of the variances. The convolution of two 1-dimensional Gaussian functions with variances $sigma_1^2$ and $sigma_2^2$ is equal to a 1-dimensional Gaussian function with variance $sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$. There is no such expectation for the multiplication of Gaussians (in fact, when multiplying them, assuming the same orientation and the same mean, the resulting variance is smaller, not larger.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$















                -1












                -1








                -1





                $begingroup$

                Your first expression,



                $G(x,sigma_1^2) G(y,sigma_2^2) = frac1sqrt2pisigma_1e^frac-x^22sigma_1^2frac1sqrt2pisigma_2e^frac-y^22sigma_2^2$ = $frac12pisigma_1sigma_2e^-(fracx^22sigma_1^2+fracy^22sigma_2^2)$



                is a correct anisotropic 2D Gaussian. The expression you are trying to obtain,



                $frac12pi(sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2)e^frac-(x^2+y^2)2sigma_1^2 + 2sigma_2^2$



                is not (it’s an isotropic Gaussian). There is no way you can go from the one to the other. However, one can incorrectly match the two expressions by creating a new coordinate system that is a scaled version of the original one, in such a way that the Gaussian is isotropic in the new coordinate system. The other answer does this. But that is not useful.



                It seems that OP is confused about the combination of the variances. The convolution of two 1-dimensional Gaussian functions with variances $sigma_1^2$ and $sigma_2^2$ is equal to a 1-dimensional Gaussian function with variance $sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$. There is no such expectation for the multiplication of Gaussians (in fact, when multiplying them, assuming the same orientation and the same mean, the resulting variance is smaller, not larger.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                Your first expression,



                $G(x,sigma_1^2) G(y,sigma_2^2) = frac1sqrt2pisigma_1e^frac-x^22sigma_1^2frac1sqrt2pisigma_2e^frac-y^22sigma_2^2$ = $frac12pisigma_1sigma_2e^-(fracx^22sigma_1^2+fracy^22sigma_2^2)$



                is a correct anisotropic 2D Gaussian. The expression you are trying to obtain,



                $frac12pi(sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2)e^frac-(x^2+y^2)2sigma_1^2 + 2sigma_2^2$



                is not (it’s an isotropic Gaussian). There is no way you can go from the one to the other. However, one can incorrectly match the two expressions by creating a new coordinate system that is a scaled version of the original one, in such a way that the Gaussian is isotropic in the new coordinate system. The other answer does this. But that is not useful.



                It seems that OP is confused about the combination of the variances. The convolution of two 1-dimensional Gaussian functions with variances $sigma_1^2$ and $sigma_2^2$ is equal to a 1-dimensional Gaussian function with variance $sigma_1^2 + sigma_2^2$. There is no such expectation for the multiplication of Gaussians (in fact, when multiplying them, assuming the same orientation and the same mean, the resulting variance is smaller, not larger.







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Mar 17 at 17:04

























                answered Mar 17 at 14:39









                Cris LuengoCris Luengo

                1849




                1849



























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid


                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1375577%2ffrom-1d-gaussian-to-2d-gaussian%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Moe incest case Sentencing See also References Navigation menu"'Australian Josef Fritzl' fathered four children by daughter""Small town recoils in horror at 'Australian Fritzl' incest case""Victorian rape allegations echo Fritzl case - Just In (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)""Incest father jailed for 22 years""'Australian Fritzl' sentenced to 22 years in prison for abusing daughter for three decades""RSJ v The Queen"

                    John Burke, 9th Earl of Clanricarde References Navigation menuA General and heraldic dictionary of the peerage and baronetage of the British EmpireLeigh Rayment's Peerage Pages

                    Football at the 1986 Brunei Merdeka Games Contents Teams Group stage Knockout stage References Navigation menu"Brunei Merdeka Games 1986".