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

Solving equations by numerical methods - The Interval Bisection method

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Maxim Protsenko

Pure Mathematics 2 Coursework

Solving equations by numerical methods

The Interval Bisection method

The coursework on Numerical Methods shows the techniques that can be applied to find the solutions of equations, which have no algebraic solution. The first method is the Interval Bisection Method. It involves finding an interval of x in which f(x) changes sigh. If f(x) is a continuous function, it follows that it has a root within that interval. The equation for this method that I took is x³+2x²-x-3=0.

image00.png

It is clearly seen on the graph that one of the roots of the equation is between 1 and 2. Within this interval f(x) changes the sigh from negative to positive. To find the root I built a table where a is the lower limit of the interval (in this case 1) and b is the upper limit of the interval (in this equation it is 2). The table looks like this.

The Interval Bisection Table

x³+2x²-x-3=0

f(x)<0

f(b)>0

A

b

(a+b)/2

f((a+b)/2)

possible error

1

2

1.5

3.375

0.5

1

1.5

1.25

0.828125

0.25

1

1.25

1.125

-0.169921875

0.125

1.125

1.25

1.1875

0.307373047

0.0625

1.125

1.1875

1.15625

0.06338501

0.03125

1.125

1.15625

1.140625

-0.054592133

0.015625

1.140625

1.15625

1.1484375

0.004064083

0.0078125

1.140625

1.1484375

1.14453125

-0.025346935

0.00390625

1.14453125

1.1484375

1.146484375

-0.0106621757

0.001953125

1.146484375

1.1484375

1.1474609375

-0.00330423657

0.0009765625

1.1474609375

1.1484375

1.14794921875

0.000378625351

0.00048828125

So the answer is 1.14794921 to (6 d. p.)

The possible error value represents the distance between the estimated root and the interval limits. The error bunds are a and b, so that x is between the two values. The error bounds for this root of the equation x³+2x²-x-3=0 are

1.1474609375 <x< 1.1484375

...read more.

Middle

, for a root of f(x)=0. Then drawing the tangent to the curve y=f(x) at the point (image02.png, f(image02.png)). The point at which the tangent cuts the x axis then gives the next approximation for the root and the process is repeated.

The equation I took for this method is x³-7x+1=0.

It looks like this:

image24.png

The gradient of the tangent at (image02.png, f(image02.png)) is f ‘(image02.png). The equation of the straight line can be written as

y-image03.png=m(x-image02.png),

the equation of the tangent is:

y-f(image02.png)=f ‘(image02.png)[x-image02.png].

This tangent cuts the x axis at (image04.png, 0), so:

0 -f(image02.png)=f ‘(image02.png)[image04.png-image02.png].

Rearranging this gives:

image04.png=image02.png-image06.png.

=> the Newton-Raphson iterative formula:

image07.png

As my equation is x³-7x+1=0, with the root in the interval [2, 3], I can rewrite it as:

f(x)= x³-7x+1=0 and f ‘(x)=image08.png.

The iterative formula is therefore:

image07.png

=image09.png

Starting with the point image02.png=3 gives

x(n)

f(x)

f '(x)

x(n+1)

3

7

20

2.65

2.65

1.059625

14.0675

2.574676

2.574676

0.044678977

12.886864

2.571209

2.571209

0.00009

12.833342

2.571201

2.571201

0.0000000004

12.83323

2.571201

The Newton-Raphson method gives an extremely rapid rate of convergence.

The first root of the equation I found is 2.571201 with the error bounds of 2.571200<x<2.571202.

...read more.

Conclusion

        But despite of this it takes lots of time to obtain one root and would take ages to do it without any computer or graphic calculator aid. Also the initial search may miss one or more root, for example when the x-axis is a tangent to the urve or when several roots are very close together.

        Newton Raphson method is the easiest way to estimate the root and takes much less time than to estimate the root using the first method. It doesn’t take that much time but it can go wrong very quickly and jump to another root.

        And the last method rearranging is the hardest one. It takes plenty of time to rearrange the equation and then to estimate the root. And it’s very likely to do something wrong using it.

        In conclusion I can say that the most efficient and easiest way for me to estimate the root, was the first one, because it takes not so much time if you get used to it. Very useful were PC programs such as Excel and Autograph. And at last the fact that in excel it is easier to change one equation on another and to get other roots, I can definitely say that it is the best method for me.

...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)

    graph is wrong. The iterations are also wrong as they diverge away from the point as well. If you differentiate the y = g(x) function and substitute x for the approximation of the root. If that g'(x) < -1 or g'(x)

  2. The open box problem

    X 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 V 40.964 41.472 41.548 41.216 40.5 39.424 38.012 36.288 34.278 32 This table shows that the maximum volume is about 41.548 and the value for x for this is 1.4.

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

    = [1/3(-x�+x+2)]1/3 g'(x) =1/9*((-x^2+x+2)^(-2/3))*(-2*x+1) The root was x= 0.8878 Hence g'(root) = -0.0.03618 Since -1< g'(x) <0 then we would expect the iteration to converge as a Cobweb y=-3x�-x�+x+2 Rearrange to x=3x�+x�-2 leads to failure. x1=1 x y 1 2 2 14 14 782 x'=9x^2+2x g'(0.8878)= 8.86929956 Since g'(root)

  2. C3 Coursework: Numerical Methods

    I shall now use the Change of Sign method to establish the error bounds. The root at the point, C, appears to be between -2 and -1. As a result of this x=-2 would be a suitable starting point. The table below shows the result to the Newton Raphson Formula when using -2 as the starting point.

  1. Change of Sign Method.

    I will use my first approximation of the value of the root, x0, to be 2. Again, the Newton-Raphson method will be applied to determine the root. As before, an Microsoft Excel spreadsheet was used to calculate where the tangent crosses the x-axis: The values that were obtained are shown

  2. C3 Numerical Solutions to Equations

    = -1.47*10^-6. f(- 2.72115744) = 8.29*10^-7. Therefore there is a root as the function is continuous. Comparison of the three methods Based on the examples used above, it seems that the Newton-Raphson method is by far the most efficient method of evaluating a root as it only took 4 iterations compared to the 7

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

    =2*B4^3-3*B4^2-8*B4+16 =2*C4^3-3*C4^2-8*C4+16 =(B4+C4)/11 =2*F4^3-3*F4^2-8*F4+16 =IF(G4>0,B4,F13) =IF(G4>0,F4,C13) =2*B4^3-3*B4^2-8*B4+17 =2*C4^3-3*C4^2-8*C4+17 =(B4+C4)/12 =2*F4^3-3*F4^2-8*F4+17 =IF(G4>0,B4,F14) =IF(G4>0,F4,C14) =2*B4^3-3*B4^2-8*B4+18 =2*C4^3-3*C4^2-8*C4+18 =(B4+C4)/13 =2*F4^3-3*F4^2-8*F4+18 =IF(G4>0,B4,F15) =IF(G4>0,F4,C15) =2*B4^3-3*B4^2-8*B4+19 =2*C4^3-3*C4^2-8*C4+19 =(B4+C4)/14 =2*F4^3-3*F4^2-8*F4+19 =IF(G4>0,B4,F16) =IF(G4>0,F4,C16) =2*B4^3-3*B4^2-8*B4+20 =2*C4^3-3*C4^2-8*C4+20 =(B4+C4)/15 =2*F4^3-3*F4^2-8*F4+20 =IF(G4>0,B4,F17) =IF(G4>0,F4,C17) =2*B4^3-3*B4^2-8*B4+21 =2*C4^3-3*C4^2-8*C4+21 =(B4+C4)/16 =2*F4^3-3*F4^2-8*F4+21 =IF(G4>0,B4,F18) =IF(G4>0,F4,C18) =2*B4^3-3*B4^2-8*B4+22 =2*C4^3-3*C4^2-8*C4+22 =(B4+C4)/17 =2*F4^3-3*F4^2-8*F4+22 =IF(G4>0,B4,F19)

  2. C3 COURSEWORK - comparing methods of solving functions

    can find out that the root in the interval of [-1, 0] is near to 0-3.5269 of 5 significant figures. n xn 1 -1.00000 -0.30000 2 -0.30000 -0.20283 3 -0.20283 -0.19613 4 -0.19613 -0.19609 5 -0.19609 -0.19609 On the other hand, from the table below, I can find out that

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