• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4
  5. 5
    5
  6. 6
    6
  7. 7
    7
  8. 8
    8
  9. 9
    9
  10. 10
    10
  11. 11
    11
  12. 12
    12

Numerical Solutions of Equations

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

        A2 Level Maths Coursework

A Level Coursework – Numerical Solutions of Equations

My coursework is based on finding roots of non-quadratic equations. I will be investigating 3 methods for finding these roots and comparing them.

Change Of Sign Method

image00.png

Y = x4+4x-6

This method simply uses Microsoft Excel to tabulate points on a function in different stages. It ‘narrows down’ the desired root by getting progressively closer to it. The root is always in the interval between the 2 x values where the y values change sign.

-5

599

-4

234

-3

63

-2

2

-1

-9

0

-6

1

-1

2

18

3

87

4

266

5

639

The roots of this equation lie in the intervals -2 < x < -1 & 1 < x < 2.

To find the lower root, I tabulated -2 < x < -1.image01.png

x

y

-2

2

-1.9

-0.5679

-1.8

-2.7024

-1.7

-4.4479

-1.6

-5.8464

-1.5

-6.9375

-1.4

-7.7584

-1.3

-8.3439

-1.2

-8.7264

-1.1

-8.9359

-1

-9

There is a change of sign between -2 & -1.9, therefore the boundaries of the root lie in this interval.

I tabulated in steps of 0.01, and again in steps of 0.001 & 0.0001

x

y

-1.924

0.007146

-1.9239

0.004697

-1.9238

0.002249

-1.9237

-0.0002

-1.9236

-0.00265

-1.9235

-0.00509

-1.9234

-0.00754

-1.9233

-0.00999

-1.9232

-0.01243

-1.9231

-0.01488

-1.923

-0.01732

x

y

-1.93

0.15488

-1.929

0.130146

-1.928

0.105457

-1.927

0.080812

-1.926

0.056212

-1.925

0.031657

-1.924

0.007146

-1.923

-0.01732

-1.922

-0.04174

-1.921

-0.06612

-1.92

-0.09046

x

y

-2

2

-1.99

1.722392

-1.98

1.449536

-1.97

1.181385

-1.96

0.917891

-1.95

0.659006

-1.94

0.404685

-1.93

0.15488

-1.92

-0.09046

-1.91

-0.33137

-1.9

-0.5679

...read more.

Middle

-1.92376

0.001269505

-1.92375

0.001024725

-1.92374

0.00077995

-1.92373

0.000535179

-1.92372

0.000290412

-1.92371

4.56502E-05

-1.9237

-0.000199108

image11.png

The other root of the equation can be found using this method. It is, to 5 significant figures, 1.1144.

Failure of the Change of Sign Method

The Change of Sign method only works for certain equations, e.g. where there is a change of sign or where a change of sign is shown in the first table of values. One equation where the Change of Sign method does not find the roots is y = 4x4-4x+1.

image12.png

x

y

-5

2521

-4

1041

-3

337

-2

73

-1

9

0

1

1

1

2

57

3

313

4

1009

5

2481

x

y

0

1

0.1

0.6004

0.2

0.2064

0.3

-0.1676

0.4

-0.4976

0.5

-0.75

0.6

-0.8816

0.7

-0.8396

0.8

-0.5616

0.9

0.0244

1

1


Newton Raphson Method

x3 – 10x + 6 = 0

image08.png

The Newton Raphson Iteration works as follows:

It is based on the formula

image13.png

F’(Xn) is F(Xn) differentiatied, so if F(Xn) = x3 – 10x + 6, than F’(xn) = 3x2 - 10. Iterations work by repeating a formula that eventually converges toward a root.

Xo is the original estimation of a root. Therefore we replace Xn with Xo.

My original estimate for the middle root is 3, so substitute 3 for Xo.

Therefore: f(Xn) = 33 – 10x3 + 6 = 3

And f’(Xn) = 3*32 – 10 = 17

X1 = 3 – (3/17) = 2.823529412 or 48/17

X2 = 2.803785064

X3 = 2.803542459

X4 = 2.803542496

X5 = 2.803542496

The other two roots of this equation are:

0.62434 & -3.4279, each to 5 significant figures.

This method can be illustrated graphically:

image14.png

image15.png

image16.png


Failure of the Newton-Raphson Method

However, the Newton-Raphson method does not work for all roots. One example of an equation where the Newton Raphson method does not work is y = 2/X3+6.

image17.png

x

y

-5

5.99936

-4

5.998047

-3

5.99177

-2

5.9375

-1

4

0

#DIV/0!

1

8

2

6.0625

3

6.00823

4

6.001953

5

6.00064

...read more.

Conclusion

However, the time it takes to set up and apply a method also affects it’s efficiency.

The Newton Raphson method took the least amount of steps to find the root, but also took the most time to substitute into the formula as the function had to be differentiated. Although this took a while, once the formula was in the calculator, it could easily be repeated for each Xn.

The Change of Sign method took 6 steps to converge to the root (up to 5 s.f.) but took by far the most time to work out. This was because the table on excel for each step had to be changed, while using the other methods a calculator could just re-iterate the chosen formula.

The Fixed Point iteration took more steps to converge to the root, twice that of Change of Sign and three times that of the Newton Raphson method. However, it was the quickest to find using hardware and software as the formula was easily re-arranged and could then be quickly written into and then re-iterated on a graphical calculator for each Xn.

...read more.

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Core & Pure Mathematics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Core & Pure Mathematics essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    C3 Coursework - different methods of solving equations.

    5 star(s)

    formula. This method is slightly complex even on easy formulas, but when we get really complicated when harder formulas are introduced. This is the hardest bit of the method as the iteration part is really simple, especially with the use of automated software/computer.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    The Gradient Function

    5 star(s)

    + n (n-1) (xn-2) h� 2! + n (n-1)(n-2) (x^n-3)(h)� + n(n-1)(n-2)(n-3) (xn-4)(h4) + ...hn 3! 4! = (nx^n-1)(h) + n(n-1) (x^n-2)(h�) + ... +h^n 2! Therefore, (x+h)n - xn = nxn-1 + n(n-1) (xn-2)(h) + ... + hn-1 h 2!

  1. MEI numerical Methods

    problem, the best method may not be the best for my investigation. Therefore the only way to conclude the best method is to look at the amount of iterations used, the rate of convergence. Rate of convergence: Rate of convergence is the speed at which a converging sequence of numbers approaches its final answer.

  2. Numerical solutions of equations

    x4 = -1.220812 x5 = -1.220744 x6 = -1.220744085 x7 = -1.220744085 I can see some convergence from x5. There has been no change in the x-values between x6 and x7 for this number of decimal places. I know that this method for finding the root has worked.

  1. C3 Numerical Solutions to Equations

    The iterations are applied using the starting point x=2 to give the following results Therefore x=1.75650874 � 0.000000005 f( 1.75650873) = 5.18*10^-8. f( 1.75650875) = -3.22*10^-8. Therefore there is a root as the function is continuous. This diagram shows the convergence of the iterations on the point where the line y=x and the curve y=g(x)

  2. Solving Equations. Three numerical methods are discussed in this investigation. There are advantages and ...

    In this case it is -0.625 which means the root can be found and the sequence converges. Can other arrangement work? There are many ways to rearrange, and are only one way to rearrange this equation, but can other rearrangement find the same target root?

  1. Numerical solution of equations, Interval bisection---change of sign methods, Fixed point iteration ---the Newton-Raphson ...

    Then the process is repeated, as shown in graph 2 The gradient of the tangent at (x1, f(x1)) is f'(x1). Since the equation of a straight line can be written y-y1 = m(x-x1), The equation of the tangent is y-f (x1)

  2. Numerical integration can be described as set of algorithms for calculating the numerical value ...

    of the absolute error of M16. This can be represented on a number line with the Mn getting closer to the exact value as n increases. From the number line below, we can see that each gap is a quarter to the one on its right; hence the mid-point rule is an overestimate.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work