Solving High-Degree Polynomial Functions: A Scientific Approach

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Panphobia
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Degree Polynomial
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around methods for solving high-degree polynomial functions, specifically those of degree five or higher. Participants explore various approaches, including numerical methods, iterative algorithms, and theoretical considerations related to the solvability of such polynomials.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest iteration as a method for finding roots of high-degree polynomials, while others emphasize the inefficiency of testing all possible values.
  • One participant mentions using Newton's method as a potential algorithm for root-finding.
  • Another participant discusses the implications of the Galois group for polynomials of degree five or higher, noting that they cannot be solved using radicals like lower-degree polynomials.
  • There is a proposal to use complex-contour integrals to express roots, although the integrals are generally not solvable in terms of elementary functions and must be evaluated numerically.
  • A participant shares a specific example involving a fourth-order root and describes a numerical integration approach to extract the root.
  • Several participants reference various iterative methods and algorithms, such as the Jenkins-Traub and Laguerre methods, for solving polynomial equations.
  • One participant describes a personal experience of finding a root through binary search, indicating a practical approach to the problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the methods for solving high-degree polynomials, with no clear consensus on a single approach. Some methods are discussed as more efficient or robust than others, but the discussion remains open-ended regarding the best techniques.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations related to the computational efficiency of certain methods and the theoretical constraints imposed by the Galois group on the solvability of high-degree polynomials.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in mathematics and engineering, particularly those dealing with polynomial equations and numerical methods for root-finding.

Panphobia
Messages
435
Reaction score
13
How would I go about solving an Nth degree polynomial function such that N>=5?

Ax^{n}+Bx^{n-1}+...+Z = 0
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Iteration, unless you stumble on some kind of factorization.
 
That might take a while with this
u(k) = (900-3k)r^{k-1}
s(n) = Σ_{k=1...n}u(k)
find r for which s(5000) = -600,000,000,000

But ok no problem, I guess I will write a program to iterate through all possible values of r.
 
Panphobia said:
That might take a while with this
u(k) = (900-3k)r^{k-1}
s(n) = Σ_{k=1...n}u(k)
find r for which s(5000) = -600,000,000,000

But ok no problem, I guess I will write a program to iterate through all possible values of r.

You would use an algorithm like Newton's method to find the roots. Testing all possible values of r is both impossible and also not particularly efficient.
 
I made some assumptions but I got the algorithm working and I got r
 
Panphobia said:
How would I go about solving an Nth degree polynomial function such that N>=5?

Ax^{n}+Bx^{n-1}+...+Z = 0
The Galois group of a general complex polynomial of degree ##n\geq 5## is not solvable. Thus, you won't be able to come up with something like the quadratic formula for ##n\geq 5##. You have to find other ways to find roots.
 
Mandelbroth said:
The Galois group of a general complex polynomial of degree ##n\geq 5## is not solvable. Thus, you won't be able to come up with something like the quadratic formula for ##n\geq 5##.

Given:

$$ w(z)=a_0+a_1 z+a_2 z^2+\cdots+a_nz^n$$

by Laurent's Expansion Theorem applied to algebraic functions, we can always write down an explicit expression (just like the quadratic formula) for the roots in terms of complex-contour integrals:

$$
w(z)=b\prod_{j=1}^N \left(z-\frac{1}{2k_j\pi i}\mathop{\oint} \frac{z_{j,k}(\zeta)}{\zeta}d\zeta\right)^{k}
$$

However, the integral is in general not solvable in terms of elementary functions so must be evaluated numerically.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
jackmell said:
Given:

$$ w(z)=a_0+a_1 z+a_2 z^2+\cdots+a_nz^n$$

by Laurent's Expansion Theorem applied to algebraic functions, we can always write down an explicit expression (just like the quadratic formula) for the roots in terms of complex-contour integrals:

$$
w(z)=b\prod_{j=1}^N \left(z-\frac{1}{2k_j\pi i}\mathop{\oint} \frac{z_{j,k}(\zeta)}{\zeta}d\zeta\right)^{k}
$$

However, the integral is in general not solvable in terms of elementary functions so must be evaluated numerically.
You know I meant "in terms of radicals, powers, addition, and subtraction," right? :-p

That's actually REALLY cool to me. I've never thought of that, so I've learned something new today. :approve:
 
Mandelbroth said:
I've never thought of that, so I've learned something new today. :approve:

We need to try one in case the reader is not sure how to do this. Let's take:

$$f(z,w)=z-w(w-1)^2(w-2)^3(w-(1+i))^4=0$$

And in order to extract the fourth-order root, we will integrate over the 4-cycle branch corresponding to this root, the ##w_{4,1}## branch, along an ##8\pi## circular path say midway the distance to the nearest singular point of ##f(z,w)## which in this case is about 0.026 so let's let ##z=0.01 e^{it}## Then we have:

$$\frac{dw}{dt}=-\frac{\frac{df}{dz}}{\frac{df}{dw}}\frac{dz}{dt}=g(z,w)$$

Then we solve the IVP:

$$\frac{dw}{dt}=g(z,w),\quad w(0)=w_{4,1}(0.01)$$

where ##w_{4,1}(0.01)## means we are starting the integration on one of the determinations of this 4-cycle branch..

We integrate that numerically and obtain the (numeric) function ##w_{4,1}##.

Then we would integrate:

$$\frac{1}{8\pi i}\oint \frac{w_{4,1}(t)}{z(t)}z'(t) dt$$

and when I solve the IVP for each determination of that branch, and solve that integral numerically, I get four values very close to ##1+i##.

Now, if I've explained that well, the reader can now write Mathematica code to extract the third-order root. It should only take about 10 lines of code. You would of course have to find which of the 10 determinations of the function correspond to the 3-cycle branch but you can just integrate over all of them; three results should be very close to 2.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
There is a Master's Thesis (in PDF format) from Oxford University posted at the following link:

http://eprints.maths.ox.ac.uk/16/1/mekwi.pdf

I think it does a pretty good job providing a general overview (and easily readable) of the various iterative methods available for solving polynomial equations.

Forming a Companion Matrix for the polynomial and solving for its eigenvalues (which are the roots of the original equation) is a very robust technique. However, it is not computationally efficient; it is better to use a method specifically designed to solve for the roots of a polynomial equation.

The Jenkins-Traub and Laguerre methods are two algorithms popular for solving for the roots of polynomial equations. There are several more; a search should reveal them.

Do you need to write a program to do this task?
Or do you just need it done, regardless of the technique?

In addition to the commercial software that can do this (e.g. - MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, etc), there are also several free tools available online that can perform this task. For example, the following Javascript program uses the Jenkins-Traub algorithm to solve for the roots of a polynomial up to degree 100:

http://www.akiti.ca/PolyRootRe.html

Hope this helps.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
What I did was just figure out what r = 1 was, then r = 10 was. Then I found out the answer was between, so I binary searched through the decimals until I got to a precise enough r. I was hoping to come up with a true maths solution. But I guess that was good enough. r = 1.002322108633
 
  • #12
That gets you one answer, but there is one for each degree (possibly complex). Depending on the context of the question you might need to do more work.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K