Talk:Graph of a function
|Graph of a function has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Mathematics. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|WikiProject Mathematics||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
|WikiProject Systems||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
I was missing these kind of topics. We should also make a list of famous curves if it isn't yet somewhere in Wikipedia. For instance the Watt's curve in spherical polar coordinates: r2 = b2 - (a sin φ ± √(c2 - a cos2 φ))2 and many more ... --XJamRastafire 19:15 Sep 18, 2002 (UTC)
Another Topic Missing: Graphing Functions. Example: How do you graph the function -3 if x≤-4?
Please, I have read "We can approximate a function --by mean of several methods-- given a functional dependence of adequate size". It seems to me that "Graph of a function" and "Functional dependence" are very closed concepts and clearly represented by a two columns table with a picture like the following:
x | y --+--- 5 | 11 2 | 5 1 | 3
Please, let me know if you know such synonym and if so, where is (and who wrote) the original definition of such a type of "functional dependence"? For my part, I know that E. F. Codd in 1972 applied the concept and used the term as a mean of database design verification/normalization. Dr. Amstrong axiomatized this kind of dependences in 1974. I try to found the original mathematical concept before its computer application (if really such thing existed before Codd/Amstrong). Thank you. [Enrique Villar; mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Graph of a function equals the function?
Article says "In mathematics, the graph of a function f is the collection of all ordered pairs (x,f(x))". The definition given is the definition of a function (so it says that the graph of a function is exactly equal to the function (by set equality)). 126.96.36.199 07:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- That's true if you define functions that way. But I don't think that's a good way to define functions - you really need the codomain as part of the definition, otherwise how can you tell whether or not the function is surjective? See also Function (mathematics)#Is a function more than its graph?. --Zundark 08:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Is it typically y vs x or x vs y?
- What is typically used is y vs. x, such that x is horizontal and y is vertical. However, when specifically talking about plotting a function vs. its input, it is more clear and intuitive to plot f(x) vs. x (or f(y) vs. y or whatever), since the variables x and y are just placeholders. EmergencyBackupChicken (talk) 17:00, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Graph vs. Plot?
The term `graph' should really be restricted to use when referring to actual graphs: nodes and edges. The `graph' of a function as described here is really its plot. This is a common misconception that leads to much confusion, and it irks me that it shows up a lot, even in academia. What would be a good way to incorporate this information while still allowing people to find what they are looking for after being told the wrong term? EmergencyBackupChicken (talk) 17:00, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
- The word graph is used in both senses in mathematics. I don't think I've ever seen plot used to refer to the graph of a function (as opposed to a graphical representation of the graph of a function). --Zundark (talk) 09:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Merge epigraph and hypograph
Someone else proposed that Hypograph (mathematics) and Epigraph (mathematics) be merged with each other, but I think they should both be merged here. As far as I can tell from a textbook I looked at briefly, not much can be said about these two notions besides their definition. So I propose to merge them here as derived concepts. JMP EAX (talk) 08:27, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
- I would prefer to merge them with each other but not here. For one thing they do have some properties that are different from the graph of a function (e.g. the application to the definition of convex functions). For another, the graph of a function is a topic of great importance in elementary and secondary-school mathematics education and I think adding more advanced concepts such as epigraphs to our article will violate WP:TECHNICAL. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:47, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- "Someone else proposed"? I have not found this someone else in the corresponding talk pages. --Txebixev (talk) 22:27, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Links to pages about graph theory in the 'See also' section
In the 'See also' section of this article, there are links to the articles Graph (mathematics) and Graph theory. Mathematically, these have nothing to with the graph of a function, so I think there's a case for removing them. I suppose they might possibly be useful for someone who was confused about the two uses of the word 'graph' in mathematics, but it seems to suggest a link between two areas of mathematics that isn't there. 19:53, 1 May 2015 (UTC)