1

I am describing a plot (in a figure in a thesis I am currently writing) as follows:

Figure of [names of some mathematical functions]. Function A is covered by Function B for x < 10. (...)

Is this correct?

Basically I want to describe that Function B has the same values for x < 10 compared to Function A. That is why Function B is only plotted for x >= 10.

  • Let f,g be the functions such that f,g < 10 but g >= 10, is that what you want? - It seems like a piecewise function. – Alejandro Jun 18 '16 at 18:31
2

I can suggest that you use the verbs coincide and overlap. Consider:

enter image description here

As you can see, output (result) of the function A coincide (overlap) perfectly with the result of function B for input variables lower than 10.


You can also say:

The Figure illustrates the excellent agreement between the result of the function A and function B for input variables lower than 10.

  • Would you not prefer the term image [of a function f] to output (result) of the function f; and input values, or simply inputs to input variables? Also, I would dispense with excellent in the second sentence. “Note: g's image coincides with f's for inputs less than 10.” – userr2684291 Jun 18 '16 at 22:02
  • @user2684291 "image of a function" sounds awkward to me as well as using apostrophe with functions. – Cardinal Jun 19 '16 at 7:01
  • I've seen these terms quite often—I'm not sure why they'd sound awkward. I suppose, perhaps in scientific papers, they're not that commonly used or summat? You can google image of a function, and if f is a name of a function then “f's” corresponds to “of f”. – userr2684291 Jun 19 '16 at 14:41

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.