Intereting Posts

Sufficiency to prove the convergence of a sequence using even and odd terms
Intuition behind the Axiom of Choice
Prove $\lim_{x\rightarrow\infty} \sqrt{x}=1$ (No L'Hôpital)
$(R/I)=R/I$
Does the equation $a^{2} + b^{7} + c^{13} + d^{14} = e^{15}$ have a solution in positive integers
Lie Groups/Lie algebras to algebraic groups
Fibonorial of a fractional or complex argument
Expectation of Ito integral
Prove $\left(\frac{a+1}{a+b}\right)^a+\left(\frac{b+1}{b+c}\right)^b+\left(\frac{c+1}{c+a}\right)^c \geqslant 3$
When do regularization methods for divergent series disagree?
Do simply-connected open sets admit simply connected compact exhaustions?
Is the following scheme for generating $p_n=(1/3)^n$ stable or not. $p_n=(5/6)p_{n-1}-(1/6)p_{n-2}$.
Is the natural map $L^p(X) \otimes L^p(Y) \to L^p(X \times Y)$ injective?
$\lfloor \sqrt n+\sqrt {n+1}+\sqrt{n+2}+\sqrt{n+3}+\sqrt{n+4}\rfloor=\lfloor\sqrt {25n+49}\rfloor$ is true?
How is the Taylor expansion for $f(x + h)$ derived?

In case of numerical integration, is it true that higher degree of precision always gives better accuracy? Justify your answer.

I know the definition of degree of precision. For Trapezoidal and Simpson’s 1/3 rule they are 1 and 3 respectively. Simpson’s 1/3 gives better accuracy than Trapezoidal rule. Then whether the above statement is true always. If not, why? If yes, then why we learn Trapezoidal/ Simpson rule? Why we shall not establish/go for higher and higher DOP from generalized Newton-Cote’s rule or other general quadrature formula

.

- How do I complete this proof that the absolute value of an integral function is an integrable function?
- Integral $\int_1^{\sqrt{2}}\frac{1}{x}\ln\left(\frac{2-2x^2+x^4}{2x-2x^2+x^3}\right)dx$
- Volume of $T_n=\{x_i\ge0:x_1+\cdots+x_n\le1\}$
- Generalized Riemann Integral: Improper Version
- Geometry of Riemann Stieltjes integration
- Integrating $\rm x^ae^{-bx}$.

- A logarithmic integral $\int^1_0 \frac{\log\left(\frac{1+x}{1-x}\right)}{x\sqrt{1-x^2}}\,dx$
- Prove that the integral of an even function is odd
- Integral $\int_0^\infty \frac{x^n}{(x^2+\alpha^2)^2(e^x-1)^2}dx$
- Integral of $\int_0^{\pi/2} \frac {\sqrt{\sin x}}{\sqrt {\sin x} + \sqrt {\cos x}}$dx
- Dirac $\delta\left( \left^2 -k^2-m^2 \right)$
- Integral $\int_0^1\frac{\arctan^2x}{\sqrt{1-x^2}}\mathrm dx$
- When can we exchange order of two limits?
- Prove $\int_0^\infty \frac{\sin^4x}{x^4}dx = \frac{\pi}{3}$
- integral of $\int \limits_{0}^{\infty}\frac {\sin (x^n)} {x^n}dx$
- Evaluate Integral with $e^{ut}\ \Gamma (u)^{2}$

Increasing the precision, both in terms of the order of the method and in the number of gridpoints used, *usually* (most of the time) leads to a more accurate estimate for the integral we are trying to compute. However this is not *always* the case as the following (aritficial) example shows.

$$\bf \text{Example where higher order does not imply better accuracy}$$

Let

$$f(x) = \left\{\matrix{1 & x < \frac{1}{2}\\0 & x \geq \frac{1}{2}}\right.$$

and consider the integral $I=\int_0^1f(x){\rm d}x = \frac{1}{2}$. If we use the trapezoidal rule with $n$ gridpoints then

$$I_{n} = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{f(\frac{i-1}{n})+f(\frac{i}{n})}{2} \implies I_n = \left\{\matrix{\frac{1}{2} & n~~\text{odd}\\\frac{1}{2} – \frac{1}{n} & n~~\text{even}}\right.$$

so for $n=3$ we have the exact answer which is better than any even $n$ no matter how large it is. This shows that increasing the number of gridpoints does not always improve the accuracy. With Simpson’s rule we find

$$I_n = \frac{1}{3n}\sum_{i=1}^{n/2}f\left(\frac{2i-2}{n}\right)+4f\left(\frac{2i-1}{n}\right)+f\left(\frac{2i}{n}\right) \implies I_n = \left\{\matrix{\frac{1}{2} – \frac{1}{3n}&n\equiv 0\mod 4\\\frac{1}{2}&n\equiv 1\mod 4\\\frac{1}{2} + \frac{2}{3n} & n\equiv 2\mod 4\\\frac{1}{2} – \frac{5}{6n} & n\equiv 3\mod 4}\right.$$

so even if Simpson’s rule has higher order we see that it does not always do better than the trapezoidal rule.

$$\bf \text{What does higher degree of precision really mean?}$$

If we have a smooth function then a standard Taylor series error analysis gives that the error in estimating the integral $\int_a^bf(x){\rm d}x$ using $n$ equally spaced points is bounded by (here for Simpsons and the trapezoidal rule)

$$\epsilon_{\rm Simpsons} = \frac{(b-a)^5}{2880n^4}\max_{\zeta\in[a,b]}|f^{(4)}(\zeta)|$$

$$\epsilon_{\rm Trapezoidal} = \frac{(b-a)^3}{12n^2}\max_{\zeta\in[a,b]}|f^{(2)}(\zeta)|$$

Note that the result we get from such an error analysis is always an upper bound (or in some cases an order of magnitude) for the error apposed to the exact value for the error. What this error analysis tell us is that if $f$ is smooth on $[a,b]$, so that the derivatives are bounded, then the error with a higher order method will tend to decrease faster as we increase the number of gridpoints and consequently we typically need fewer gridpoints to get the same accuracy with a higher order method.

The order of the method only tell us about the $\frac{1}{n^k}$ fall-off of the error and says nothing about the prefactor in front so a method that has an error of $\frac{100}{n^2}$ will tend to be worse than a method that has an error $\frac{1}{n}$ as long as $n\leq 100$.

$$\bf \text{Why do we need all these methods?}$$

In principle we don’t need any other methods than the simplest one. If we can compute to arbitrary precision and have enough computation power then we can evaluate any integral with the trapezoidal rule. However in practice there are always limitations that in some cases forces us to choose a different method.

Using a low-order method requires many gridpoints to ensure good enough accuracy which can make the computation take too long time especially when the integrand is expensive to compute. Another problem that can happen even if we can afford to use as many gridpoints as we want is that truncation error (errors due to computers using a finite number of digits) can come into play so even if we use enough points the result might not be accurate.

Other methods can elevate these potential problems. Personally, whenever I need to integrate something and has to implement the method myself I always start with a low-precision method like the trapezoidal rule. This is very easy to implement, it’s hard to make errors when coding it up and it’s usually good enough for most purposes. If this is not fast enough or if the integrand has properties (e.g. rapid osccilations) that makes it bad I try a different method. For example I have had to compute (multidimensional) integrals where a trapezoidal rule would need more than a year to compute it to good enough accuracy, but with Monte-Carlo integration the time needed was less than a minute! It’s therefore good to know different numerical integration methods in case you encounter a problem where the simplest method fails.

- Characterisation of one-dimensional Sobolev space
- stopped filtration = filtration generated by stopped process?
- Books on complex analysis
- Visual references for the Riemann-Stieltjes integral.
- Why is the localization of a commutative Noetherian ring still Noetherian?
- Continuous function from a compact space to a Hausdorff space is a closed function
- I want to understand uniform integrability in terms of Lebesgue integration
- product of path connected space is path connected
- Generalization of the Jordan form for infinite matrices
- Can anyone clarify how a diverging sequence can have cluster points?
- Bounded Sequences
- Proving that the general linear group is a differentiable manifold
- what is the probability that the selected function maps prime numbers to prime numbers?
- Given the first N integers, how many large prime factors can I disallow and still have half the set remaining?
- sum of this series: $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{4n^2-1}$