Verifying the Exactness of Simpson's Rule for Integrating f(x)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lanza52
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integrating
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion centers around verifying the exactness of Simpson's Rule for integrating a cubic polynomial function, specifically in the context of the integral from π to 42. Participants are exploring the implications of the error bound associated with Simpson's Rule and the behavior of the fourth derivative of the polynomial.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the error bound formula for Simpson's Rule and its application to a cubic polynomial. There are attempts to clarify the definition of the constant k and its implications for the error in approximation. Questions arise regarding the assumptions made about the fourth derivative and the bounds of integration.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the nature of the fourth derivative for cubic polynomials and its effect on the error term. Some participants suggest that the error is zero due to the properties of the polynomial, while others seek to clarify definitions and assumptions. There is no explicit consensus yet, but productive lines of reasoning are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the bounds of integration are from π to 42, and there is some confusion regarding the notation and definitions used in the discussion. The original poster expresses uncertainty about their reasoning and the validity of their conclusions.

Lanza52
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Let a0, a1, a2, a3 be arbitrary real numbers, and let

f(x) = a0 + a1*x + a2*x^2 + a3*x^3

Show that the approximating the integral [tex]\int f(x)dx[/tex][/tex] ( Couldn't figure out the bounds using latex but the integral is from pi to 42) with Simpson's rule yields the exact value of this integral.


My initial thought was to go to the error bound.
k > or = f''''(x) ...so k > or = to 0

And since K is a coefficient in the numerator the error is 0.


But that seems way too easy. My professor likes giving 10 hour take home tests, so I can't be right.

So, what did I miss? Or by some odd chance am I right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You certainly seem to have a good idea. But...

Lanza52 said:
My initial thought was to go to the error bound.
k > or = f''''(x) ...so k > or = to 0

And since K is a coefficient in the numerator the error is 0.
I don't understand what you are saying; the only reason I can follow this is because I (think I) know what you're trying to say. (for example, you suddenly started using the symbols k and K without ever defining them!)

Try thinking this bit through a little more carefully.
 
Oh, sorry, forgot to say the formula.

Error bound formula for Simpson's rule

(Amount of error) < or = (k(b-a)^5) / (180n^4)

the fourth derivative of f(x) < or = to k for a < or = x < or = b

and since f(x) is a 3rd degree polynomial, it gets reduced to 0 at the fourth derivative.

And that makes k = 0 and so the error is 0.
 
Lanza52 said:
Oh, sorry, forgot to say the formula.

Error bound formula for Simpson's rule

(Amount of error) < or = (k(b-a)^5) / (180n^4)

the fourth derivative of f(x) < or = to k for a < or = x < or = b

and since f(x) is a 3rd degree polynomial, it gets reduced to 0 at the fourth derivative.

And that makes k = 0 and so the error is 0.
If all you know is:
(1) [itex]f^{(4)}(x) = 0[/itex],
(2) [itex]f^{(4)}(x) \leq k \quad (\text{for\ } x \in [a, b])[/itex],
then all you can do is conclude that k is nonnegative.

Fortunately, you know more than this.

(Wait, where did a and b come from? I suppose that you meant for them to be the bounds on your integral, although you never said so)
 
Last edited:
Hurkyl said:
If all you know is:
(1) [itex]f^{(4)}(x) = 0[/itex],
(2) [itex]f^{(4)}(x) \leq k \quad (\text{for\ } x \in [a, b])[/itex],
then all you can do is conclude that k is nonnegative.

Fortunately, you know more than this.

(Wait, where did a and b come from? I suppose that you meant for them to be the bounds on your integral, although you never said so)

lol yea, sorry a and b are the bounds. Keep forgetting that I'm not talking to somebody who is looking at the same textbook and formula as me.

Anyways. The bounds being pi and 42.

I'm not sure but I think the formula works like this:

First find the formula for k
k > or = f '''' (x) = 0

If there was an x derived from that 4th derivative then you would plug in this.
pi < or = x < or = 42.

But since there is no x then the k is just 0
 
The definition of k given here is a little lax. k= the largest value of the absolute value of the fourth derivative over the given interval. For this example f''''(x)=0 on the interval of [Pi,42] thus k=0. Fortunately for us, for any polynomial of degree 3 or less the fourth derivative is 0 for all real values of x. Therefore, we can assume that simpson's rule will yield an exact answer for those polynomials.
 
Lanza52 said:
Let a0, a1, a2, a3 be arbitrary real numbers, and let

f(x) = a0 + a1*x + a2*x^2 + a3*x^3

Show that the approximating the integral [tex]\int f(x)dx[/tex][/tex] ( Couldn't figure out the bounds using latex but the integral is from pi to 42) with Simpson's rule yields the exact value of this integral.


My initial thought was to go to the error bound.
k > or = f''''(x) ...so k > or = to 0

And since K is a coefficient in the numerator the error is 0.


But that seems way too easy. My professor likes giving 10 hour take home tests, so I can't be right.

So, what did I miss? Or by some odd chance am I right?

A MUCH easier way is to note that we can look at 3-point cases sequentially (that's how the Simpson formula is obtained for an arbitrary odd number n >= 3 of points); furthermore, we can assume the three points are x1 = -1, x2 = 0 and x3 = 1 (by shifting and scaling if necessary). For these three points we have Simpson(f) = (1/3)*[f(-1)+4f(0)+f(1)]. Now for odd n, x^n is odd and so int{x^n dx, x=-1..1) = 0, and Simpson(x^n) = 0; thus, Simpson is exact for x^n, n odd (i.e., for x, x^3, x^5,... ). Now look at f0(x) = 1 and f2(x) = x^2. We can easily compute int(f(x), x=-1..1) for f = f0 and f = f2, and can compute Simpson(f) for f = f0 and f = f2. We see that Simpson(f) = integral(f) for these two f; thus, Simpson(f) = integral(f) for any cubic polynomial f.

RGV
 
i had the same "problem" with my problem
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K