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

# Solution of equations by numerical methods.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

P2 courseworkDavid Effah

PURE MAHEMATICS 2 COURSEWORK

SOLUTION OF EQUATIONS BY NUMRICAL METHODS

1. Change of sign Method
• Decimal Search
• Chosen Equation: Y = 2X3 – 5X -2 There are three possible roots for this equation as its graph crosses the x-axis three times. By looking at the graph it is possible to estimate the where about of the roots. Furthermore by testing for the existence of change of sign between any two chosen points I could be able to decide if there is a root or not. Looking at the graph of any equation is also vital as there might be some discontinuities.

I will be testing if there is a root between points [-1,0].

1. For [-1,0] – Substituting this two points in the equation Y = 2X3 – 5X-2     gives:
 x -1 0 y 1 -2

As it can be seen there is a change of sign, which implies that there is a root between the two points. To find this point to a limited degree of accuracy I will be using decimal search, whose working out is shown below.

 x 0 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3 -0.4 -0.5 -0.6 -0.7 -0.8 -0.9 -1 y -2 -1.502 -1.016 -0.554 -0.128 0.25 0.568 0.814 0.976 1.042 1 x -0.4 -0.41 -0.42 -0.43 -0.44 -0.45 -0.46 -0.47 -0.48 -0.49 -0.5 y -0.12800 -0.08784 -0.04818 -0.0090 0.029632 0.067750 0.105328 0.142354 0.178816 0.21470 0.25000 x -0.43 -0.431 -0.432 -0.433 -0.434 -0.435 -0.436 -0.437 -0.438 -0.439 -0.44 y -0.009 -0.00513 -0.0012 0.0026 0.00651 0.01037 0.014236 0.01809 0.02194 0.02579 0.0296 x -0.432 -0.4321 -0.4322 -0.4323 -0.4324 -0.4325 -0.4326 -0.4327 -0.4328 -0.4329 -0.433 y -0.0012 -0.00086 -0.0005 -0.0001 0.00031 0.0007 0.001084 0.00147 0.00186 0.00225 0.0026

Location of root: -0.4324 < x < -0.4323

The estimated root is –0.432 to three decimal places.

Error Bound: -0.432 + 0.0005

A case of failure for the Decimal Search method

To demonstrate this I have chosen the equation

Middle

-50.76

-72.61

-128.85

-600.57

221.38

92.70

58.31

42.37

33.17

x

0.795

0.7951

0.7952

0.7953

0.7954

0.7955

0.7956

0.7957

0.7958

0.7959

0.796

y

-600.57

-951.66

-2295.6

5542.9

1254.2

706.66

491.70

376.89

305.46

256.74

221.38

The decimal search method suggests that the location of the root is:

0.7952< x < 0.7953.

To three decimal places the estimated root is 0.795.

Error Bound: 0.795 + 0.0005

Reason: As there is a change of sign at either side of the asymptote, the method converges to the point where vertical asymptote crosses the x-axis.

Demonstration:

In order for Y= [(X2 +1) / (5X4 - 2)] -1 to be undefined the denominator has to be zero.

5X4 – 2 = 0

5X4 = 2

X4 = 2/5

X= (2/5) X = + 0.795(3dp.)

Therefore it is impossible to have 0.795 as a root. This clearly shows the failure of the decimal search as it gave as a root that is incorrect.

1. Rearranging f(x) =0 in the form x=g(x)
• Chosen equation:  Y = X3 –12X + 5 • The graph of this equation crosses the X-axis three times, therefore

Y = X3 –12X + 5 has three roots. The estimated where about of these roots are between points [-4, -3], [0,1], and [3,4]. To be certain I will be looking if there is a change of sign when substituting these points. The results are as follows:

 X -4 -3 Y -11 14
 X 0 1 Y 5 -6
 X 3 4 Y -4 21

There are three roots found between the above-mentioned points. I will use the rearranging method to find the root between [0,1].

• Rearranged equation:X = (12x –5)

General Iterative Formula:Xn+1=(12xn –5)

Results found by taking x1 as 3 are:

 x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 x7 x8 x9 3 3.141381 3.197673 3.219544 3.227962 3.231191 3.232427 3.232900 3.233081 x10 x11 x12 x13 x14 x15 x16 x17 x18 3.233151 3.233177 3.233187 3.233191 3.233193 3.233193 3.233194 3.233194 3.233194

The estimated root converges to 3.2332(5sf.).

Error Bound: 3.2332 + 0.00005

• Graph of the rearranged equation, g(x) = (12x –5) is shown below: The magnitude of the gradient of g(x) for values of x should be close to the root. The rearrangement of the equation will work if and only if;

-1<g’(x) <1

g’(x) =                 4         => when x is 3.2332, g’(x)=  0.3826

(12x –5)2/3

Since this value is between (-1, 1) the method works for this root.

Problem with the rearrangement method

I will still be using the equation Y = X3 –12X + 5.  From the graph and test for change of sign we know that there is a root between -3 and  -4. To find the root close to x = -4 I will use the previous equation used for rearranging method.

• Rearranged equation:X = (X3 + 5) / 12

General Iterative Formula:Xn+1=[(X n)3 +5] / 12

Results found by taking x1 as -4 are:

 x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 x7 -4 -4.9167 -9.4878 -71.000 -29519 -2.1436 * 1012 -8.2082 * 1036

Conclusion

The Newton-Rapson method was fairly easy as well. At times the Newton-Raphson method might be laborious, as long differentiations has to be carried out. While using excel I had to insert long formulas when applying this method. This problem also happens when using a calculator.

On the other hand the decimal search method takes a long time. Finding the root of an equation to three decimal points using the decimal search method considerably takes a long time and is tedious.

Speed of convergence

By using the Newton-Rapson method I was able to find the roots that I was looking for very rapidly. While comparing each method using the same equation it only took four steps to get the estimated root, compared to seven for that of the rearrangement method.

As it is stated above the rearrangement method has a fairly fast convergence. Changing the equation f(x) into the form g (x) is a crucial point. Any error will result in failure to find the root. Sometimes it could be very long depending on the equation that we are trying to find the root for.

The decimal search method takes a long time as it is mentioned above. Having to keep on splitting the boundaries of a root in order to reach to the closest point to the precise root is a long process. If we were trying to find a root to five or more decimal places it would be laborious and cumbersome.

Although all the three methods have their own disadvantages, if carefully applied to an appropriate equation they would give a good estimation of the root(s) of an equation to a limited degree of accuracy.

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

# Related AS and A Level Core & Pure Mathematics essays

1.  ## C3 Coursework - different methods of solving equations.

5 star(s)

-1.96180 -0.004775254 -1.96179 -0.004280068 -1.96178 -0.003784896 -1.96177 -0.003289738 -1.96176 -0.002794593 -1.96175 -0.002299463 -1.96174 -0.001804347 -1.96173 -0.001309244 -1.96172 -0.000814155 -1.96171 -0.000319081 -1.96170 0.00017598 X f(x) -2.0 -2 -1.99 -1.45736 -1.98 -0.92928 -1.97 -0.41553 -1.96 0.084135 -1.95 0.569938 -1.94 1.042111 -1.93 1.500882 -1.92 1.946474 -1.91 2.37911 -1.90 2.79901 The root of the function f(x)

2. ## MEI numerical Methods

Assuming it does we will be able to approximate the root for another value of K. It will only be a approximation as the value of our roots are approximations. To prove that there is a common factor, C we do the following: (assume k=(k+1)

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

Newton Raphson converges to a value near to -0.6180 The Newton Raphson does NOT automatically trap the root between two values In our example it looks like the root is just below 1.618034. We proposed it was 1.6180 to 5sf We need to use the change of sign method to trap the root between two solution bounds We evaluate f(1.61805)

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

Close roots In some cubic function there are 2 close roots and this method will also fail in this situation. Our target root is between 0 and 1 and if we use 0 and 1 as the upper and lower bound then we will find another root instead of our target root.

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

Besides, the rearranging method takes two more steps---eight steps, shown on spreadsheet 3.4, to get the answer. By comparing the number of iterations need to find the root in the interval of [1 ,2] in 5 decimal places, it is clear that Newton-Raphson Method has the fastest speed of convergence.

2. ## I am going to solve equations by using three different numerical methods in this ...

I have chosen a non-trivial equation y=10(x-1.32)(x-1.98)(x-1.55)+0.1.And the graph shows: We can see these three roots are very close together. They are all in the interval [1, 2].By using the Excel: A B f(a)<0 f(b)>0 (a+b)/2 y=10(x-1.32)(x-1.98)(x-1.55) 1 2 -1.6248 0.1612 1.5 0.1432 1 1.5 -1.6248 0.1432 1.25 -0.0533 1.25

1. ## Different methods of solving equations compared. From the Excel tables of each method, we ...

0.68928520 0.00000000 0.68928519 0.00000000 0.00000000 0.68928519 0.00000000 0.68928519 0.00000000 0.68928519 0.00000000 0.00000000 Since this method cannot find out all the roots, we say that it fails in this case. For the example above, it is because the three roots lie too close together.

2. ## C3 COURSEWORK - comparing methods of solving functions

roots and therefore, Newton Raphson is the best method to solve the equation. If you only had a graphic calculator By using graphic calculator, we can draw the graph out first, which may let us see if there is going to be a clear change of sign. • Over 160,000 pieces
of student written work
• Annotated by
experienced teachers
• Ideas and feedback to 