Compare Riemann Integration & Definite Integration Accuracy

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter shreyarora
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration Riemann
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on comparing Riemann integration and what some participants refer to as "normal definite integration" in terms of accuracy. The scope includes theoretical aspects of integration methods and their practical implications in real-life problems.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on the term "normal definite integration," suggesting it may refer to Riemann integration itself.
  • Another participant proposes that "normal definite integration" could imply the use of Riemann sums, which approximate integrals using finite rectangles.
  • A formula for estimating the accuracy of Riemann sums is provided, indicating that the error decreases with an increasing number of rectangles.
  • One participant expresses a desire to justify the accuracy of Riemann integration in a real-life context compared to the method they defined as "normal definite integration."
  • There is a suggestion that using the term "Riemann sum" may reduce confusion, as "ordinary integration" is identified as Riemann integration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the definitions of "normal definite integration" and Riemann integration, leading to differing interpretations of accuracy and methodology.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved definitions and assumptions regarding the terms used in the discussion, particularly concerning what constitutes "normal definite integration" and the implications for accuracy in integration methods.

shreyarora
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Can some please draw a comparison between Riemann Integration and normal definite integration in terms of accuracy.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi shreyarora, and welcome to PF :smile:

Can you please expand your question a bit?
What do you mean with "normal definite integration", to my knowledge that simply is the Riemann integral?
And what do you mean with accuracy? Riemann integration is 100% accurate, it uses no approximations what-so-ever.

We'll be in a better position to answer you if you let is know where you're coming from...
 
I suspect that by "Riemann integration" he is referring to actually using a finite number of rectangles to approximate the integral- that is, Riemann sums.

Shreyarora, the formula for the accuracy is given in any Calculus book. For example, on page 487 of Salas, Hille, and Etgen's Calculus, the error in using n rectangles to approximate
\int_a^b f(t)dt
is given as less than
(f(b)- f(a))\frac{b- a}{n}

So, for example, if you use 10 rectangles to integrate
\int_0^1 x^2 dx
Your error would be less than (1-0)((1- 0)/10) or 1/10.

Of course, the trapezoidal method and Simpson's rule give better accuracy.
 
Thanks HallofIvy, I think you got most of what I meant say.

By normal integration I meant that, if you integrate x^2 from a to b, you substitute limits to x^3/3.
whereas, the computation differs while evaluating integral using Riemann Integration.

I am actually writing an article wherein I have to justify that using Riemann Integration yields accurate results to a real life problem over the "normal definite integration" that I have defined above.

Or is it actually possible to compare the two methods?
 
Its probably better (and less confusing) to say "Riemann sum" instead of Riemann integration. 'Ordinary integration' is Riemann integration. That is,

<br /> \int_1^2 x^2 dx=\frac{1}{3}x^3|_1^2=\frac{7}{3}<br />

I just performed Riemann integration. But I could I have approximated the Riemann integral with a Riemann sum using say, the left endpoint:

<br /> \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} (1+k\Delta x)^2 \Delta x<br />

where \Delta x =(2-1)/N
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K