First step to proof of convergance using Newton's root finding method

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter trelek2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Method Proof Root
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the convergence of Newton's root-finding method applied to functions of the form f(x) = x^m - c, where c and m are greater than 1. Participants explore the behavior of the iterative sequence generated by Newton's method and seek to establish a formal proof of the convergence properties of this sequence.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that starting with an initial guess x_0 = c leads to a sequence where x_0 > x_1 > x_n > x_{n+1} > c^{1/m}, but seeks a formal proof of this assertion.
  • Another participant provides a reformulation of the Newton's method update step, suggesting that the next guess x* can be expressed in terms of the current guess x and the parameters m and c.
  • A participant questions whether the established inequalities can be proven without first demonstrating that x^m > c, indicating a concern about the circular reasoning in the proof attempt.
  • One participant suggests that the function and its derivative being positive is sufficient for the inequalities to hold, provided that x_n > c^{1/m}, and proposes a method to show that the function has a minimum at this point.
  • Another participant introduces the mean value theorem as a potential tool for proving the convergence, outlining a method that involves comparing the values of the function and its derivative at the initial guess and the root.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the sufficiency of the arguments presented for proving convergence. There is no consensus on a formal proof, and multiple approaches are suggested, indicating ongoing debate and exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the behavior of the function and its derivatives are not fully explored, and the discussion highlights the dependence on the conditions set by the parameters m and c. The mathematical steps involved in the proposed proofs remain unresolved.

trelek2
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
Suppose I am looking for the root of a function of the form:
[tex]f(x)=x ^{m}-c[/tex], where c,m>1.

Suppose I take my first guess to be [tex]x _{0}=c[/tex].

Then using Newtons method my next guess will be given by:
[tex]x _{n+1}=x _{n} - \frac {f(x _{n})}{f'(x _{n})}[/tex].

From this, or thinking about this graphically it is obvoius that
[tex]x _{0}>x _{1}>x _{n}>x _{n+1}>c^{1/m}[/tex].

However I don't know how should I go about formally proving this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To save writing, let x be current value and x* the next.

x*=x - (xm-c)/mxm-1={(m-1)xm+c}/mxm-1
< mxm/mxm-1=x, since c<xm.
 
Hmm, I knew this, but is this a proof?

Don't we need to prove that [tex]x^{m}>c[/tex] ?

I get the impression that if I want to prove that
[tex] x _{0}>x _{1}>x _{n}>x _{n+1}[/tex]
I need to use [tex]x^{m}>c[/tex]

And it is easy to prove that [tex]x^{m}>c[/tex] but only if we are sure that:
[tex] x _{0}>x _{1}>x _{n}>x _{n+1}[/tex]

I'm a physics student so I'm not used to proving things formally. Are you sure what you have written is enough?

I also thought of the following proof:
We know that:
[tex] x _{0}>x _{1}>x _{n}>x _{n+1}[/tex]
Due to the fact that the function as well as its derivative are >0.
This is true only for [tex]x_{n}>c^{1/m}[/tex]
But we can show that using Newtons method the function x* (what you had written) has a minimum at [tex]x_{n}=c^{1/m}[/tex] (I do this by taking (x*)' and equating it to 0).

Hence we know that [tex]x_{n}>=c^{1/m}[/tex] Therefore the argument stated in the beginning is definitely true: using this fact we know that x* is strictly decreasing and from this it follows that x*>[tex]c^{1/m}[/tex]
 
Initially you have c > 1, so the initial guess (c) needs cm > c, which is certainly true for c > 1.
 
Hi trelek, you could also use the "mean value theorem" to prove it fairly easily. An outline would go something like this :

Let "a" be the root and "b" (with b>a) be the inital guess. By the mean value theorem there exists some k : a < k < b, such that

f(b) - f(a) = f'(k)(b-a).

Since f' is monotonic increasing it follows that

f(b) - f(a) < f'(b)(b-a)

and since f(a)=0 it follows that f(b) / f'(b) < (b-a)

so

b - f(b)/f'(b) > a
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K