• 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
  13. 13
    13
  14. 14
    14

Numerical Solutions of Equations.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

P2 Maths Coursework Numerical Solutions of Equations HANNAN SHAH Introduction In this coursework I intend to use numerical methods to find the solutions of equations that cannot be solved algebraically. Many simple equations can be solved using methods such as factorising or the quadratic formula but such methods cannot be applied to more complicated equations. My intention is to use three methods of numerical analysis to solve some of these more complex equations, show problems associated with these methods and then to compare their relative merits. The methods I will be using are decimal search, fixed point iteration using Newton-Raphson and fixed point iteration after rearranging f(x) = 0 into the form x = g(x). Decimal Search Assuming that you are looking for the roots of the equation f(x) = 0 you want to find the values of x for which the graph of y = f(x) crosses the x-axis. As y = f(x) crosses the x-axis, f(x) changes sign (from + to -), provided that f(x) is continuous. Using decimal search I will attempt to find one root of the equation y = x5+4x�-1. The graph for this function is shown below. The graph clearly shows that there are three roots in the intervals [-2, -1]. [-1,0] and [0,1]. I am going to attempt to find the value of the root in the interval [0,1]. I will start at one decimal place by taking values of x between 0 and 1 in increments of 0.1. The table on the left shows that there is a change of sign between x = 0.4 and x = 0.5. ...read more.

Middle

-1.618 as this is nearest to the point where the tangent of x = 0.8 meets the x axis and the following tangents do not have such a low gradient that may cause them to diverge away from x = -1.618 and back towards the root in the interval [0,1]. Fixed Point Iteration (Rearranging f(x) = 0 in the form x = g(x) This method uses an estimate for the value of x using an iterative process. By rearranging f(x) = 0 into the form x = g(x) provides an iterative formula which will converge to a required root by picking an appropriate starting value. On a graph the roots will be equal to the values of x where the curve y = f(x) intersects the line y = x. The graph for y = x5-3x+1 shows the roots lie in the intervals [-2,-1], [0,1] and [1,2]. x5-3x+1 = 0, therefore x = x5+1 3 This provides the iterative formula: xn+1 = xn5+1 3 The curves above show y = x and y = g(x) = x5+1. 3 With the equation in the form x = g(x) means that you are now finding the points of intersection between the curves rather than when the curve y = x5-3x+1 crosses the x-axis. I will first attempt to find the root in the interval [0,1]. I will take the end point of this interval (x = 1) as the starting point. xn xn+1 = x5+1 3 x0 = 1 x1 = (15 + 1) � 3 = 0.66667 x1 = 0.66667 x2 = (0.666675 + 1) ...read more.

Conclusion

Yet decimal search also had a problem by not showing a change of sign in the first set of calculations when the root had two decimal places. Therefore, ignoring any potential problems I think that fixed point iteration and Newton-Raphson are quicker than decimal search at converging to the required root. I have already made some mention of the use of technology to help speed up the process of finding the roots. Microsoft Excel was of great benefit when making calculations, as it only required the input of the initial values and the formulae. A few mouse clicks gave the results for the entire set of values within a few seconds. Autograph was another very useful piece of software as it could be used to instantly visualise curves and gradient functions. This meant that within seconds I could produce an accurate curve instead of having to make some calculations and draw the curve myself. Autograph also allowed me to see the intervals of the roots (or points of intersection in fixed point iteration). This saved a lot of time as I could easily pick appropriate starting values without having to waste time using trial and error to pick my starting value. Autograph was very useful for both Newton-Raphson and fixed point iteration as it had an inbuilt function to make the various calculations in with a few mouse clicks and these could be used to confirm the values obtained from Microsoft Excel. It was also excellent for showing the iterative processes for both methods by zooming in on the roots as I have shown many times when using these numerical methods. HANNAN SHAH P2 Maths Coursework Hannan Shah Numerical Solutions of Equations Page 2 of 14 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

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

    The Gradient Function

    5 star(s)

    Here, it is a little hard to prove this in the normal sense as (x+h) is square rooted, so I will need to rationalize the numerator. V (x+h) - Vx = V (x+h) - Vx x + h -x h V (x+h)

  2. Am going to use numerical methods to solve equations that can't be solved algebraically

    One way is 4x= x5+2 which gives x= g(x) x5 + 2 4 Plotting the graph of y=x and y=g(x) will show where the roots lie, as where the two lines cross is where the roots are. The intervals in which my roots lie are: [-2,-1], [0, 1] [1, 2] Consequently the interactive formula is Xn+1= x5 + 2

  1. The open box problem

    To prove that this is not just a coincidence, I will now test my hypothesis on another square, one with dimensions of 24x24. If the value of x turns out to be 4 (one sixth of 24) then I will know that this is right.

  2. C3 Coursework: Numerical Methods

    Unlike the Change of Sign method, before using the x-g(x) method it is necessary to calculate g(x) first. This adds additional time to the procedure making the g(x) method slightly slower. If this method was to be carried out manually it would probably take much more time than when using software.

  1. C3 Mei - Numerical Methods to solve equations

    Therefore the root is 0.3215 to four significant figures. Newton Raphson Method x 0.333333333 0.321596244 0.321504034 0.321504029 0.321504029 The Newton-Raphson Method clearly found the root within 3 iterations. From this method, we can see that the root is 0.3215 to 4 significant figures. Rearrangement Method x 0.333333333 0.319615912 0.321786041 0.321461461 0.321510444 0.321503062 0.321504175 The rearrangement method found the root within 6 iterations.

  2. MEI numerical Methods

    While with a calculator we would have to start from scratch. Finally to carry out iterations on excel is extremely easy, all you have to do is drag the cell down in order to copy the formula over and excel will automatically convert the formula for the new cell.

  1. In this coursework, I am going to solve equations by using the Numerical Methods. ...

    -1.59 -1.58 -1.57 -1.56 -1.55 -1.54 -1.53 -1.52 -1.51 -1.50 y -2.443 -2.145 -1.853 -1.566 -1.285 -1.009 -0.738 -0.472 -0.211 0.0437 sign - - - - - - - - - + From this we know that the root lie between -1.51 and -1.50, so now we will zoom between -1.51 and -1.50 to see where the root lies.

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

    Algebraically this can be donated as [f(?) + f(?+h)](h/2). The length of the next trapezium in figure 1.1 is [f(2) + f(3)](h/2); similarly in algebraic terms [f(?+h) + f(?????h?]??h???? As a result the total area in figure 1.1 can be given as follows: [f(?) + f(?+h)](h/2) + [f(?+h) + f(?????h?]?h??????[f(?+2h) + f(?????h?]?h??? + [f(?+3h) + f(?????h?]?h?????? [f(??????[f(??h)

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