Graphics Reference
In-Depth Information
n
f ( x )=
B i,k ( x ) P i
i =1
n
m
=
P i α i,k ( j ) N j,k ( x )
i =1
j =1
m
n
=
[
P i α i,k ( j )] N j,k ( x )
j =1
i =1
where α i,k ( j ) is given by equation (7.15). Comparing this with equation (7.7),
we get the following statement:
(3) For k = 1, from equation (7.15),
a j ) 0 +
a j ) 0 + .
α i, 1 ( j )=( τ i +1
( τ i
(7.17)
It agrees with α i, 1 ( j ) given by case 1, for any a j
[ t j ,t j +1 ). Similarly, for
k = 2 we get,
α i, 2 ( j )=[ τ i +1 i +2 ] φ j, 2
[ τ i,τ i +1 ] φ j, 2
with
a j ) 0 + ( y
t j +1 ) .
This agrees with α i, 2 ( j ) for the case 2, described above, for any a j ν [ t j .t j +2 ).
Now to prove Theorem 1, we present two lemmas. The first lemma is due
to Marsden [120].
Lemma 1 :
For any y
φ j, 2 ( y )=( y
and any x
[ t k ,t m +1 ), we have
m
x ) k− 1 =
( y
Ψ j,k ( y ) N j,k ( x ) ,
(7.18)
j =1
where Ψ j,k is given by equation (7.5).
Proof (deBoor [53]):
m
For k = 1 we get from the lemma 1, 1 =
N j, 1 ( x ), which follows from
j =1
equation (7.10). For k
2, one can use the recurrence relation of deBoor [53],
Cox [47]
N j,k ( x )=( x
t j ) Q j,k− 1 ( x )+( t j + k
x ) Q j +1 ,k− 1 ( x ) ,
(7.19)
where
Q j,k ( x )= N j,k ( x ) / ( t j + k
t j ) ,
t j + k >t j ,
(7.20)
=0 ,
otherwise.
Letting ζ k =( y
x ) k− 1 in equation (7.18), we get
Search WWH ::




Custom Search