Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
BISECTION METHOD
RATE OF CONVERGANCE OF BISECTION METHOD
REGULAR FALSI METHOD
RATE OF CONVERGANCE OF THE REGULAR FALSI
METHOD
EXAMPLES OF COMPARISION
REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
BISECTION METHOD
Let us consider an alternative approach to rootfinding. Consider a function f(x) = 0 which we
desire to find the roots of. If we let a second variable y = f(x), then y will (almost always) change
sign between the left-hand side of the root and the right-hand side. This can be seen in the above
picture of y = ln(x), which changes from negative to the left of the root x = 1 to positive to its
right.
The bisection method works by taking the observation that a function changes sign between two
points, and narrowing the interval in which the sign change occurs until the root contained within
is tightly enclosed. This only works for a continuous function, in which there are no jumps or
holes in the graph, but a large number of commonly-used functions are like this including
logarithms (for positive numbers), sine and cosine, and polynomials.
Though the bisection method is not guaranteed to find all roots, it is guaranteed to find at least
one if the original endpoints had opposite signs.
The process above is repeated until you're as close as you like to the root.
The idea of the bisection method is based on the fact that a function will change sign when it
passes through zero. By evaluating the function at the middle of an interval and replacing
whichever limit has the same sign, the bisection method can halve the size of the interval in each
iteration and eventually find the root.
When an interval contains a root, the bisection method is the one that will not fail. However, it is
among the slowest. When an interval contains more than one root, the bisection method can find
one of them. When an interval contains a singularity, the bisection method converges to that
singularity.
Where (a,b)
If 1
=
Comparing it with the Rate of convergence equation
=c
More formally:
Draw or calculate the equation for the line between the two endpoints (a,f(a)) and
(b,f(b)).
Find where this line intersects the x-axis (or when y = 0), giving you x = c
Use this x value to evaluate the function, giving you f(c)
The sub-intervals are then treated as in the bisection method. If the sign changes between
f(a) and f(c), keep the inteval; otherwise, throw it away. Do the same between f(c) and f(b).
Repeat until you're at a desired accuracy.
The false position method, which sometimes keeps an older reference point to maintain an
opposite sign bracket around the root, has a lower and uncertain convergence rate compared to
the secant method. The emphasis on bracketing the root may sometimes restrict the false position
method in difficult situations while
f(x) = 0
+ =
+ =
+ =
On simplification
= + ……..(1)
= + ……....(2)
= + ………..(3)
Now According to the Regular Falsi Method
Using (1), (2) and (3) put the values in the above equation
+ =
+ = +
= ……..(4)
Applying the Taylors Theorem
+………………
+………………
+………………
Here the
*[
=c
=c Now = ……….(7)
=
Or
=
Therefore
(Using (7))
………..(8)
=
This is becomes a quadratic equation so the solution of the equation may be written as
f(x) = cos x ½
BISECTION METHOD
• Initial guesses x =0 and x =
• Expect linear convergence: |xn+1| ~ |xn|/2.
0.130900
1 -0.4999984721161
-0.0654498
2 -0.5000015278886
0.0327250
3 -0.4999969442322
-0.0163624
4 -0.5000036669437
0.00818126
5 -0.4999951107776
-0.00409059
6 -0.5000110008581
0.00204534
7 -0.4999755541866
-0.00102262
8 -0.5000449824959
0.000511356
9 -0.4999139542706
-0.000255634
10 -0.5001721210794
0.000127861
11 -0.4996574405018
-0.0000638867
12 -0.5006848060707
0.0000319871
13 -0.4986322611303
-0.0000159498
14 -50274110020.188
0.0000
15 0801862
-0.0317616
1 0.0963178807113
-0.00305921
2 0.09340810209172
-0.000285755
3 0.09312907910623
-0.0000266121
4 0.09310313729469
-0.00000247767
5 0.09310037252741
-0.000000230672
6 0.09310059304987
-0.0000000214757
7 0.09310010849472
-0.00000000199939
8 0.09310039562066
9 -0.000000000186144 0.09310104005501
-0.0000000000173302
10 0.09310567679542
-0.00000000000161354
11 0.09316100003719
-0.000000000000150319
12 0.09374663216227
-0.0000000000000140919
13 0.10000070962752
-0.0000000000000014092
14 0.1620777746239
-0.0000000000000002284
15
CONCLUSION
In this term paper, we learnt various root finding methods which use different ways to find the
iteration. Through this task we came across to know the best possible method among the
mentioned ones which gives us the fastest result, i.e. Closest to the root. The methods have been
compared in various ways and the relative error in each method had been estimated. We came
across the conclusion that the Regular Falsi method is the best root finding method among all the
mentioned methods. We also came to know that some of the methods include complex
calculations while others had simple but elaborate calculations. Some methods had complex
calculations but requires less time in finding the roots where as others had easier calculations but
consumed more time.
REFERENCES
http://www.infofanz.com/2009/01/25/definition-and-comparison-to-secant-method-
regular-falsi-method-and-the-newton-raphson-method/
http://www.springerlink.com/content/h7t68152081n6344/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35213998/Final-AssignmentEEE20-Numerical-analysis