MHB Find Order of Accuracy: Solve Mistake Worried

  • Thread starter Thread starter evinda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Accuracy
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining the order of accuracy for a numerical method given specific values of step sizes and errors. The initial calculation led to an incorrect result, suggesting a misunderstanding of the relationship between the errors and step sizes. A participant corrected the approach by noting that since the smaller step size should yield a smaller error, the correct formula involves the ratio of the errors and step sizes. The revised calculation shows that the order of accuracy is indeed 1, aligning with expectations. The key takeaway is the importance of accurately applying the relationship between error and step size in numerical methods.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hello! (Wave)

Suppose that we are given $h_1=0.1 \to \delta_1=0.01$ and $h_2=0.05 \to \delta_2=0.025$ and we want to find the order of accuracy of the method.
I have tried the following:

$\delta_1^n= c h_1^{p+1}, \delta_2^n=c h_2^{p+1} \Rightarrow p+1= \frac{\log \left( \frac{\delta_1^n}{\delta_2^n}\right)}{\log \left( \frac{h_1}{h_2} \right)}= \frac{\log 2- \log 5}{\log 2} \Rightarrow p= \frac{- \log 2}{\log 5}$.

But the result should be 1. Where is my mistake? (Worried)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
evinda said:
Hello! (Wave)

Suppose that we are given $h_1=0.1 \to \delta_1=0.01$ and $h_2=0.05 \to \delta_2=0.025$ and we want to find the order of accuracy of the method.
I have tried the following:

$\delta_1^n= c h_1^{p+1}, \delta_2^n=c h_2^{p+1} \Rightarrow p+1= \frac{\log \left( \frac{\delta_1^n}{\delta_2^n}\right)}{\log \left( \frac{h_1}{h_2} \right)}= \frac{\log 2- \log 5}{\log 2} \Rightarrow p= \frac{- \log 2}{\log 5}$.

But the result should be 1. Where is my mistake? (Worried)

Hey! (Smile)

Since $h_2$ is smaller than $h_1$, I'd expect $\delta_2$ to be smaller than $\delta_1$. :eek:

Perhaps it should be:
$$p+1= \frac{\log \left( \frac{\delta_1}{\delta_2}\right)}{\log \left( \frac{h_1}{h_2} \right)}
=\frac{\log \left( \frac{0.01}{0.0025}\right)}{\log \left( \frac{0.1}{0.05} \right)}
= \frac{\log 4}{\log 2} = 2 \qquad\Rightarrow\qquad p = 1$$
(Wondering)
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
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...
Back
Top