MHB Comparing Difference Quotients for Approximating $f'''(x)$

  • Thread starter Thread starter evinda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Difference
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the accuracy of two difference quotients for approximating the third derivative, $f'''(x)$. The first difference quotient has an error bound of $\frac{22}{4} h ||f^{(4)}||_{\infty}$, while the second has a smaller error bound of $\frac{3}{4} h ||f^{(4)}||_{\infty}$. This suggests that the second difference quotient is a more accurate approximation due to its smaller constant. Participants discuss the need for a formal justification of this conclusion, with suggestions to express the error terms in a sharper form. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of error analysis in determining the accuracy of numerical approximations.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hello! (Wave)

I have to show that the following difference quotients are approximations of $f'''(x)$.

$$\frac{f(x+3h)-3f(x+2h)+3f(x+h)-f(x)}{h^3} \\ \frac{f(x+2h)-2f(x+h)+2f(x-h)-f(x-2h)}{2h^3}$$

Which approximation is more accurate? Justify your answer.I found the Taylor expansion of $f(x+3h) , f(x+2h), f(x+h)$ and found that

$$\left| \frac{f(x+3h)-3f(x+2h)+3f(x+h)-f(x)}{h^3}-f'''(x) \right| \leq \frac{22}{4} h ||f^{(4)}||_{\infty}$$

Have we shown now that $\frac{f(x+3h)-3f(x+2h)+3f(x+h)-f(x)}{h^3}$ is an approximation of $f'''(x)$?
Or do we have to show that the above tends to $0$ ?

Similarly, I found that

$$\left| \frac{f(x+2h)-2f(x+h)+2f(x-h)-f(x-2h)}{2h^3}-f'''(x) \right| \leq \frac{3}{4} h ||f^{(4)}||_{\infty}$$

The second difference quotient is a better approximation because of the smaller constant, right ?

But how could we justify it formally? (Thinking)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
evinda said:
The second difference quotient is a better approximation because of the smaller constant, right ?

But how could we justify it formally? (Thinking)

Hey evinda! (Smile)

I think that what you have is already sufficiently formal.

The only thing I can think of to improve it, is to set the expressions equal to $\frac{22}{4} h f^{(4)}(x+\theta h)$ respectively $\frac{3}{4} h f^{(4)}(x+\xi h)$, where $0\le\theta\le 1$ and $0\le\xi\le 1$.
I'd consider that sharper than giving an upper bound. (Thinking)
 
I like Serena said:
Hey evinda! (Smile)

I think that what you have is already sufficiently formal.

The only thing I can think of to improve it, is to set the expressions equal to $\frac{22}{4} h f^{(4)}(x+\theta h)$ respectively $\frac{3}{4} h f^{(4)}(x+\xi h)$, where $0\le\theta\le 1$ and $0\le\xi\le 1$.
I'd consider that sharper than giving an upper bound. (Thinking)

Nice... Thanks a lot! (Smile)
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top