• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Pure Mathematics - In this coursework, I will be investigating and comparing the use of 3 different numerical methods for finding roots of equations.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Azeem Mir

Pure Mathematics 2 Coursework

Introduction

In this coursework, I will be investigating and comparing the use of 3 different numerical methods for finding roots of equations. The numerical methods that I will be using for this coursework are as follows:

  1. Change of sign: Decimal search
  2. Fixed point iteration: Newton-Raphson Method
  3. Rearranging f(x)=0 to the form x=g(x)

Change of Sign: Decimal Search

image00.png

For this method I will be using the above equation:  x³-4x²-3x+5=0. The first step for this method is to construct a table of values that range the values of the x-axis that the graph passes:

x

F(x)

  -5

-205

-4

-111

-3

-49

-2

-13

-1

3

0

5

1

-1

2

-9

3

-13

4

-7

5

15

F(x) changes sign between [-2,-1], [0,1] and [4,5]; indicating that a root lies between each of these x co-ordinates. The next few steps can now be repeated to obtain a more accurate value, taking x1 and x2 to be the lower and upper possible bounds of x. I shall be testing x between 4 and 5.

The table below gives the corresponding y-values for the f(x) values between x1=4 and x2=5. From this, it can be seen that a root lies between x=4 and x=5.

x

F(x)

4.0

-7

4.1

-5.61967

4.2

-4.07234

4.3

-2.35343

4.4

-0.45665

4.5

1.62554

4.6

3.89644

4.7

6.36388

4.8

9.03272

4.9

11.90922

5.0

15

The new values of x would be x1=4.4 and x2=4.5. These steps can be repeated to a necessary level of accuracy; each time gaining an extra decimal place. So far, x can be expressed as x=4.45 ±0.05, or 4.4<x<4.5.

...read more.

Middle

x

F(x)

1.0

2.49245

1.1

1.81617

1.2

1.20565

1.3

0.68818

1.4

0.29363

1.5

0.05452

1.6

0.00565

1.7

0.18412

1.8

0.62966

1.9

1.38411

2.0

2.49256

Fixed point iteration: Newton-Raphson Method

image02.png

To investigate this method, I shall use the function x³-3x²-3x+4=0. The equation is shown above. This method involves taking a rough approximation of x, and then improving this each time to get a more accurate value for x. Each successive iteration is calculated from the last using the formula: x1=x0-(F(x0))/(F’(x0)).

The differential of my formula is 3x²-6x-3=0. There is a root between x=0 and x=1 as indicated by the graph so I shall take my first value to be x=1. Therefore, the next value of x is calculated as follows:

                  x1=1-(F(1)/(F’(1))

                  x1=1-(-1/-6)

                  x1=0.833333333

Taking the x1=1, the new approximation of x is calculated as follows:

                  X2=0.833333333-(F(0.833333333)/(F’(0.833333333))

                  X2=0.833333333-(-1.963*10^-3/-5.916)

                  X2=0.832668188

And the next value of x:

                  X2=0.832668188-(F(0.832668188)/(F’(0.832668188))

                  X2=0.832668188-(-6.94*10-04/-5.92)

                  X2=0.832550958

Any other number of repetitions of this process past this point gives the same value of x of 0.83255, correct to 5 s.f.; i.e. ±0.000005.

To test that 0.83255 is a root, f(0.832545) and f(0.832555) are calculated. These equal

3.44*10-05 and -2.48*10-04 respectively. As there is a change of sign ±0.000005 either side of 0.83255, it can be concluded that this is a root.

This method can quickly find a very accurate estimate of the root in very few steps, with the accuracy limited only by the device used to calculate x.

...read more.

Conclusion

-0.00104

0.65669

-0.000257851

0.656629

-3.1761E-05

0.69

-0.12149

0.66

-0.0125

0.657

-0.00141

0.6567

-0.000294914

0.65663

-3.5468E-05

0.7

-0.157

So 0.65662 < x < 0.656621. By contrast, the equivalent result of ±0.00005 using the Newton-Raphson method takes only three iterations:

x

Δx

0.5

0.5

0.6471

0.1471

0.6566

0.009514

0.6566

4.76E-05

0.6566

1.20E-09

0.6566

2.22E-16

0.6566

1.11E-16

0.6566

0

image08.png

The G(x) iteration method is also faster than the decimal search method with 7 iterations:

G(x)

Δx

0.8

0.2

0.7024

0.0976

0.6693

0.03309

0.66

0.009342

0.6575

0.002476

0.6568

0.0006446

0.6567

0.000167

0.6566

4.32E-05

0.6566

1.12E-05

image09.png

So in speeds of convergence, the Change of Sign method takes 24 steps, x=g(x) method takes 7 steps and the Newton-Raphson method takes 3 for this equation. This order of speed is a good representation of most equations that I have encountered.

However, the Change of Sign method takes the least initial work; for the Newton-Raphson method, f'(x) needs to be calculated. For many possible equations, differentiating them is very tedious and for some advanced equations beyond my capabilities and  for each step, more calculations are required. The x=g(x) method requires rearranging the formula to start with, and in many cases, this results in a non-continuous function (e.g. involving odd roots). For continuous functions with more than one root, the G(x) method will usually fail to find at least one of them due to the differences in gradient steepness.

I believe that the Change of Sign method is the best for finding all the roots of a function, considering that I use specialized graph producing software (Autograph) to do all the calculations in these methods. The time taken to perform calculations is negligible, especially when placed in context with the time to calculate the f'(x) or g(x). Also, this method is the most reliable with most equations that I have encountered.

...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)

    Here is the proof: Newton Raphson method This method works by plotting the f(x) on a graph and visually looking at between what two points the root is (in single units such as 1 or 5 or 9). Then we draw a tangent at that point on the graph. E.g.

  2. MEI numerical Methods

    D.P because of its display screen, however excel is accurate to 15 D.P. My calculation was done to 9 D.P. This is because I felt it 9D.P would be close to the real root and it would still be neat and easy to understand.

  1. Numerical solutions of equations

    0.680 -0.005007 0.681 0.001510 The change of sign is between x = 0.680 and x = 0.681 x f(x) 0.6801 -4.355665x10-3 0.6802 -3.704544x10-3 0.6803 -3.053279x10-3 0.6804 -2.401872x10-3 0.6805 -1.750322x10-3 0.6806 -1.098629x10-3 0.6807 -4.467927x10-4 0.6808 2.051866x10-4 The change of sign is between x = 0.6807 and x = 0.6808 x f(x)

  2. This coursework is about finding the roots of equations by numerical methods.

    Error bounds I saw from my last table in Excel that the root lies in range (2.56155, 2.56156) x f(x) 2.56155 -1.8E-05 2.56156 4.63E-05 So the solution bounds are 2.56155 and 2.56156 I can also write the solution bounds as 2.561555 � 0.000005.

  1. In my coursework I will be using three equations to investigate their solutions using ...

    68.33947621 1.5 8.96010996 1.75 4.894805335 2 1.80244321 2.25 0.151773585 2.5 0.41154646 2.75 3.050511835 3 8.53741971 2 1.80244321 2.125 0.76759996 2.25 0.151773585 2.375 0.013557835 2.5 0.41154646 2.625 1.40433321 2.225 0.23860501 2.25 0.151773585 2.275 0.084046585 2.3 0.03589276 2.325 0.00778086 2.35 0.000179635 2.375 0.013557835 2.4 0.04838421 I can now see from both the

  2. Numerical integration coursework

    That means that when you double the amount of strips (n) the error decreases by about a factor of 4, the error multiplier is therefore 0.25. Error in Simpson?s rule Finally, in Simpson?s rule the error is proportional to h4, this means there is a constant, again k, such that absolute error Sn= kh2, where k is the constant.

  1. C3 COURSEWORK - comparing methods of solving functions

    However, if we do the integer search, we can only get 1 change of sign. The search will find the first root 0.61074687 in this interval [0, 1]. In order to find all the change of signs, we better draw a graph.

  2. Fractals. In order to create a fractal, you will need to be acquainted ...

    and as we defined before, the Mandelbrot set consists of the points that are connected in the Julia set. This simple recursive formula provides the creation of these types of complex fractals: Created at www.easyfractalgenerator.com with constant -0.80102 - 0.10772i The SierpiÅksi Triangle is a preeminent type of fractal that

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