What is the analytical expression for the error function and its integrals?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the analytical expression for the error function and its complementary function, erfc, as well as the derivation and analysis of their integrals. Participants explore definitions, integration techniques, and numerical methods related to these functions.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant requests clarification on the derivation of the integral for the error function, referencing an external link.
  • Another participant notes that understanding the explanation may depend on the background knowledge of integration techniques, such as changing variables.
  • A participant provides definitions for erfc(z) and erf(z), explaining their relationship and how to derive the integral expression for erfc(z).
  • There is a repeated inquiry about the derivation of the integral from 0 to z and its relation to the error function's value from -inf to +inf.
  • One participant mentions that numerical methods are typically used to find values for erf(x), with the exception of x=0, which has a simple closed-form value.
  • Another participant expresses dissatisfaction with the necessity of numerical methods but acknowledges that this does not indicate a lack of understanding of fundamental concepts.
  • A participant draws a comparison between erfc(x) and other functions like ln(x), suggesting that the familiarity with certain functions influences perceptions of their complexity.
  • There is a reference to a related discussion about the integration of x^x, highlighting the diversity of mathematical challenges.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the complexity of the error function and its numerical evaluation. While some agree on the necessity of numerical methods for most values, others emphasize the importance of understanding the underlying definitions and relationships between the functions.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on participants' backgrounds for understanding integration techniques and the unresolved nature of the analytical expressions for various integrals related to the error function.

Physics news on Phys.org
What constitutes an explanation will depend on your background. Do you know about integration techniques such a changing variables? And do you know that the definition of erfc(x) itself involves an integral?
 
Well, the definition of erfc(z) is actually:

erfc(z) \equiv 1 - erf(z)

However, this can be pretty easily changed to the integral definition if we remember that

erf(z) \equiv \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_0^z exp\left(-t^2\right) dt

and furthermore that

\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_0^\infty exp\left(-t^2\right) dt = 1

By substituting these definitions in for 1 and erf(z), we get this expression:

erfc(z) = \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_0^\infty exp\left(-t^2\right) dt - \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_0^z exp\left(-t^2\right) dt

Which is easily proven using basic integral properties to be equal to the expression in the OP.
 
Thanks for the derivation. My final question is how one would analyze this integral (from 0 to z as you have it). Is it along the same lines we go about to derive the value of the error function from -inf to +inf?
 
We usually just find values numerically. The only value that I know of where erf(x) takes a simple, closed-form value is x=0. Other than that, it's all approximation.
 
Thanks for your timely response. Although knowing that it has to be found numerically makes me slightly unhappy I'm glad to find that I wasn't missing anything more fundamental.
 
nanath said:
Thanks for your timely response. Although knowing that it has to be found numerically makes me slightly unhappy I'm glad to find that I wasn't missing anything more fundamental.

The erfc(x) is a function which is used exactly like the functions exp(x), ln(x), cos(x) or many others. All these functions have to be found numerically (except for a few particular values of x).
For example, what is the analytical expressiion of :
integrate (1/t)*dt from t=1 to t=x ?
Of course, the answer is ln(x). Then would you say "knowing that it has to be found numerically makes me slightly unhappy" ?

The only difference between erfc(x) and ln(x) is that one is familiar to you and the other not.

An almost similar question arised elsewhere about the integration of x^x. The consequence was a funny discussion reported in the paper "The Sophomores Dream Function" :
http://www.scribd.com/JJacquelin/documents
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K