Convergence rate (with unknown exact solution)

  • Thread starter Thread starter fred_91
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convergence Rate
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around computing the integral I=\int_0^1 f(x) dx for a function f(x) that cannot be evaluated analytically. The original poster is interested in using the Trapezium method with uniform steps to obtain a numerical approximation of the integral and subsequently compute the convergence rate of this approximation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of the Trapezium method and Aitken's extrapolation formula to approximate the integral. There are questions about the correct formulation of the trapezium method and how to compute the convergence rate based on the approximations obtained for different values of N.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering clarifications and suggestions on how to analyze the convergence rate. There is a focus on identifying potential errors in the formulas and exploring the implications of the approximations made.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of specific values for N (25, 50, 100) and the need to analyze the differences between the approximations and the estimated real value to observe trends in convergence.

fred_91
Messages
38
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I want to compute the following integral

I=\int_0^1 f(x) dx

for a function f(x) such that the integral I cannot be evaluated analytically.
f(x) is a known function.
Therefore we want to obtain I numerically. To do this we want to use the Trapezium method with uniform steps for x.
Then after that we need to compute the convergence rate.

Homework Equations


Using the trapezium method, we will split the nodes for x using equidistant steps x_0,x_1,x_2,...x_N
In general, we have
I=\int_a^b f(x) dx = \frac{b-a}{N}\left( f(x_0)+2f(x_1)+2f(x_2)+ 2f(x_3)+...+ 2f(x_{N-1}) +f(x_n) \right)

Aitken's extrapolation formula can be written as:
\overline{I}=I_i+\frac{(I_{i+1}-I_i)^2}{2I_{i+1}-I_i-I_{i+2}}
for 3 consecutive points: I_{i},I_{i+1},I_{i+2}.

The Attempt at a Solution



In our case, a=0, b=1. We will take 3 cases for N: N=25, N=50, N=100.
Therefore, we will have 3 approximations: I_1, I_2, I_3 corresponding to N=25, 50, 100 respectively.

Now we can find a good approximation to the real value using Aitken's approximation:
\overline{I}=I_1+\frac{(I_2-I_1)^2}{2I_2-I_1-I_3}

However, how does this help us to compute the convergence rate?

Any ideas or guidance is very much appreciated.

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think there is a 2 missing in the denominator of your first formula.

However, how does this help us to compute the convergence rate?
You could check the difference between the approximation and the estimated real value for N=25, 50, 100 and see if there is some clear trend (like 1/N, 1/N^2 or similar).
 
Thank you for your reply.

Which missing 2 do you mean? For the formula of the trapezium method?

Oh right, I see, you mean to compute:
|\bar{I}-I_1|, |\bar{I}-I_2|, |\bar{I}-I_3| ?
 
fred_91 said:
Which missing 2 do you mean? For the formula of the trapezium method?
Right.

Oh right, I see, you mean to compute:
|\bar{I}-I_1|, |\bar{I}-I_2|, |\bar{I}-I_3| ?
Right. It could give a hint about the convergence rate.
 
Oh right, I see the missing 2 :)

the formula should be:
I=\int_a^b f(x)dx=\frac{b-a}{2N}\left(f(x_0)+f(x_1)+f(x_2) + f(x_3)+...+f(x_{N-1})+f(x_N) \right).

So, I could say that
|\bar{I}-I_1| is an approximation of the error?

Thanks again.
 
and similarly for I_2, I_3.
 
fred_91 said:
So, I could say that
|\bar{I}-I_1| is an approximation of the error?
Sure.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K