Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js
Classroom note

A practical strategy to improve performance of Newton's method in solving nonlinear equations


  • Received: 02 December 2022 Accepted: 02 December 2022 Published: 19 January 2023
  • Newton's method is a popular numeric approach due to its simplicity and quadratic convergence to solve nonlinear equations that cannot be solved with exact solutions. However, the initial point chosen to activate the iteration of Newton's method may cause difficulties in slower convergence, stagnation, and divergence of the iterative process. The common advice to deal with these special cases was to choose another inner point to repeat the process again or use a graph of the nonlinear equation (function) to choose a new initial point. Based on the recent experiences in teaching preservice secondary-school mathematics teachers, this classroom note presents a simple and practical strategy to avoid many of the difficulties encountered in using Newton's method during solving nonlinear equations. Instead of plotting the graph of an equation to help choose the initial point, the practical strategy is to use the middle point of the range as the initial point to start the iterative process of Newton's method. By solving ten different nonlinear equations using Newton's method initiated from the endpoints and the middle point respectively, the results show that choosing the middle point of a defined range to initiate the iterative process for Newton's method seems a general and practical strategy to avoid the difficulties encountered in using the method to solve nonlinear equations with faster convergence in most cases.

    Citation: William Guo. A practical strategy to improve performance of Newton's method in solving nonlinear equations[J]. STEM Education, 2022, 2(4): 345-358. doi: 10.3934/steme.2022021

    Related Papers:

    [1] William Guo . The Laplace transform as an alternative general method for solving linear ordinary differential equations. STEM Education, 2021, 1(4): 309-329. doi: 10.3934/steme.2021020
    [2] Changyan Di, Qingguo Zhou, Jun Shen, Li Li, Rui Zhou, Jiayin Lin . Innovation event model for STEM education: A constructivism perspective. STEM Education, 2021, 1(1): 60-74. doi: 10.3934/steme.2021005
    [3] William Guo . Unification of the common methods for solving the first-order linear ordinary differential equations. STEM Education, 2021, 1(2): 127-140. doi: 10.3934/steme.2021010
    [4] Shuangji Yao, Yunfei Guo, Botao Yang, You Lv, Marco Ceccarelli, Xiaoshuang Dai, Giuseppe Carbone . Single-objective flexible job-shop scheduling problem based on improved dung beetle optimization. STEM Education, 2024, 4(3): 299-327. doi: 10.3934/steme.2024018
    [5] Tanya Evans, Sergiy Klymchuk, Priscilla E. L. Murphy, Julia Novak, Jason Stephens, Mike Thomas . Non-routine mathematical problem-solving: Creativity, engagement, and intuition of STEM tertiary students. STEM Education, 2021, 1(4): 256-278. doi: 10.3934/steme.2021017
    [6] William Guo . Solving problems involving numerical integration (I): Incorporating different techniques. STEM Education, 2023, 3(2): 130-147. doi: 10.3934/steme.2023009
    [7] William Guo . Solving problems involving numerical integration (Ⅱ): Modified Simpson's methods for equal intervals of odd numbers. STEM Education, 2023, 3(3): 171-189. doi: 10.3934/steme.2023011
    [8] Zhongyan Hu, Yun Fah Chang, Ming Kang Ho . A comparative study on the effectiveness of blended learning, physical learning, and online learning in functional skills training among higher vocational education. STEM Education, 2024, 4(3): 247-262. doi: 10.3934/steme.2024015
    [9] Gaifang Dong . Successes and lessons from a trial of the three-way university-enterprise cooperation program on data science and big data processing technology in China. STEM Education, 2022, 2(4): 293-302. doi: 10.3934/steme.2022018
    [10] Zhenglin Wang . Fast non-uniform Fourier transform based regularization for sparse-view large-size CT reconstruction. STEM Education, 2022, 2(2): 121-139. doi: 10.3934/steme.2022009
  • Newton's method is a popular numeric approach due to its simplicity and quadratic convergence to solve nonlinear equations that cannot be solved with exact solutions. However, the initial point chosen to activate the iteration of Newton's method may cause difficulties in slower convergence, stagnation, and divergence of the iterative process. The common advice to deal with these special cases was to choose another inner point to repeat the process again or use a graph of the nonlinear equation (function) to choose a new initial point. Based on the recent experiences in teaching preservice secondary-school mathematics teachers, this classroom note presents a simple and practical strategy to avoid many of the difficulties encountered in using Newton's method during solving nonlinear equations. Instead of plotting the graph of an equation to help choose the initial point, the practical strategy is to use the middle point of the range as the initial point to start the iterative process of Newton's method. By solving ten different nonlinear equations using Newton's method initiated from the endpoints and the middle point respectively, the results show that choosing the middle point of a defined range to initiate the iterative process for Newton's method seems a general and practical strategy to avoid the difficulties encountered in using the method to solve nonlinear equations with faster convergence in most cases.



    In real-world applications, a great number of nonlinear equations cannot be solved with exact solutions. The common strategy to solve such complicated problems is to obtain its approximate solution using an appropriate procedure known as 'numeric approach' or 'numeric computation'. There are many different established numeric methods for solving various nonlinear equations. Newton's method is a popular approach among the numeric methods due to its simplicity and quadratic convergence. Hence, it has been widely presented in many mathematics textbooks [1,2,3,4,5,6] and books of numeric computation [7,8,9].

    According to [10], Newton's method was originally presented as an immature form by Newton as a special case of the method in the 1670s, which was actually different from the current method. After a number of attempts by other mathematicians since then, Joseph Raphson found a simplified expression for this method in 1690, from which Thomas Simpson formulated the method as an iterative process to solve general nonlinear equations using the derivative of a function. This iterative process became the current formula of Newton's method, sometimes also called the Newton-Raphson method, but Simpson was missed in the brand of the modern method he formulated.

    Despite the simplicity of Newton's method in iterative numeric computation through computer or calculator programs with a general quadratic convergence [9], a number of difficulties have been noticed over the years. For example, there is no guarantee that the solution (or root) for the nonlinear equation is unique in a given range [a, b] even the process is certain to be convergent. A chosen initial point, usually a or b, does not ensure the process converging to the root for special cases where the derivative at the initial point is zero. In other instances, the process fails in progression where the derivative at the initial point does not exist.

    Given the diverse causes behind the difficulties, there has been no concrete strategy proposed to effectively deal with the difficulties mentioned in most mathematics textbooks. For instance, the 'normal cases' were used to demonstrate the iterative process for Newton's method in [4,7] to avoid addressing any of the difficult situations. For the circumstances where the derivative at the initial point is zero or does not exist, a new initial point should be chosen as suggested in [1,2,8,9], but no concrete strategies were offered for how to choose the new initial point. Using graphs was suggested to choose a new initial point in [3,5] when encountering divergence in the iterative process or the derivative at the initial point is zero or does not exist. This works but also means a halt in automatic processing of iteration when the execution is through a computer program.

    In this note, based on the classroom experience in teaching solving nonlinear equations using Newton's method to preservice secondary-school mathematics teachers at Central Queensland University (CQU) of Australia in recent years, a practical strategy for choosing the initial point to the iterative process for both the normal and special cases is shared with the mathematics teaching and learning communities around the world.

    Solving an equation f(x) = 0 within [a, b] is equivalent to finding the point x = xr (∈ [a, b]) where f(x) intersects the x-axis (Figure 1). Such a point x = xr is called the root for f(x) = 0 if it exists. It is not easy to judge if any root exists for a general equation f(x) = 0, but in a situation where f(a) and f(b) have opposite signs, such point (or points) indeed exists. This is because for a continuous and differentiable function f(x) defined within [a, b], the curve of the function must cross the x-axis at least once so that f(a) and f(b) have opposite signs.

    Figure 1. 

    Process of approaching the root x = xr for equation f(x) = 0 by Newton's method

    .

    Newton's method uses a sequence of x-intercepts of the tangent lines from an initial point x0 (usually either a or b) to approximate the root for equation f(x) = 0 within [a, b]. Suppose the initial point to be x0 = b (Figure 1). The tangent line on f(x) at (x0, f(x0)) crosses the x-axis at x1 and the tangent of this line is the derivative of f(x) at x0 = b, i.e.,

    f(x0)=f(x0)x0x1x0x1=f(x0)f(x0)x1=x0f(x0)f(x0).

    This means that x1 can be determined by the values of x, y and y′ at the initial point x0. The new point x1, closer to xr compared to x0, can be used to find a new x-intercept x2 in a similar way as follows

    f(x1)=f(x1)x1x2x1x2=f(x1)f(x1)x2=x1f(x1)f(x1).

    Obviously x2 is even closer to xr compared to x1. Repeating this process will take the consecutive x-intercepts approaching the root of the equation. This iterative procedure is captured by the following recurrent relation, called Newton's method:

    xi+1=xif(xi)f(xi), i=0,1,2,3,... (1)

    The iteration terminates when the difference of two consecutive x-intercepts is smaller than a pre-set error limit, i.e., |xi+1xi|<ε, which indicates how close the approximate value of xi is to the root xr. If such condition is met after the ith iteration, an acceptable approximate solution is found for f(x) = 0, i.e., xrxi+1. Note that i begins from 0.

    This section presents different examples of nonlinear equations solved using Newton's method to demonstrate some difficulties in using this method.

    Example 1: Solve equation f(x)=1xlnx=0 in [1,3] using Newton's method with ε = 0.001.

    Since f(a) = f(1) = 1 and f(b) = f(3) = 1/3 – ln3 ≈ –0.7653, Newton's method can be used to solve this nonlinear equation.

    f(x)=1xlnxf(xi)=1xilnxi=1xilnxixif(x)=(1xlnx)=1x21x=1+xx2f(xi)=1+xix2i

    Formula (1) becomes

    xi+1=xif(xi)f(xi)=xi1xilnxixi1+xix2i=xi+xi(1xilnxi)1+xi.

    Let x0 = a = 1.

    x0+1=x1=x0+x0(1x0lnx0)1+x0=1+1×(11×ln1)1+1=1+12=1.5.

    Since |x1x0|=|1.51|=0.5>ε=0.001, let x1 = 1.5.

    x2=x1+x1(1x1lnx1)1+x1=1.5+1.5×(11.5×ln1.5)1+1.51.7351.

    Since |x2x1|=|1.73511.5|=0.2351>ε=0.001, let x2 = 1.7351.

    x3=x2+x2(1x2lnx2)1+x2=1.7351+1.7351×(11.7351×ln1.7351)1+1.73511.7629.

    Since |x3x2|=|1.76291.7351|=0.0278>ε=0.001, let x3 = 1.7629.

    x4=x3+x3(1x3lnx3)1+x3=1.7629+1.7629×(11.7629×ln1.7629)1+1.76291.7631.

    Since |x4x3|=|1.76311.7629|=0.0002<ε=0.001, the approximate solution is xx4 = 1.7631.

    The iterative process above can also be realized using Excel as a table shown below.

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| |xi+1xi| < ε
    0 1 1.5 0.5 N
    1 1.5 1.7351 0.2351 N
    2 1.7351 1.7629 0.0278 N
    3 1.7629 1.7632 0.0003 Y
    xx4 = 1.7632

    Of course, if choosing x0 = b = 3, the similar iterative process should lead to the same solution for this case as shown in the table below. Note this choice takes one more iteration to reach the same root. This is a 'normal case' where choosing any of the two end points ensures convergence of iteration to the same root where the curve of f(x) crosses the x-axis showing in Figure 2.

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| |xi+1xi| < ε
    0 3.0000 1.2781 1.7219 N
    1 1.2781 1.6632 0.3851 N
    2 1.6632 1.7593 0.0961 N
    3 1.7593 1.7632 0.0039 N
    4 1.7632 1.7632 0.0000 Y
    xx5 = 1.7632

    Figure 2. 

    The root crossing the x-axis for equation f(x) = 0 in Example 1

    .

    Example 2: Solve equation x32x+2=x+2 in [0, 1] using Newton's method with ε = 0.001.

    We first rearrange x32x+2=x+2 to f(x)=x32x+2x+2. Solving the equation becomes solving equation f(x)=x32x+2x+2=0. Since f(a)=f(0)=220.5858 and f(b)=f(1)=12+230.7321, Newton's method can be used to solve this nonlinear equation.

    f(x)=x32x+2x+2.f(xi)=x3i2xi+2xi+2.f(x)=(x32x+2x+2)=3x2212x+2f(xi)=3x2i212xi+2

    Formula (1) becomes

    xi+1=xix3i2xi+2xi+23x2i212xi+2=xi(2xi+2)(x3i2xi+2xi+2)(2xi+2)(3x2i2)1.

    Let x0 = a = 0. The iterative process using the formula above is tabulated in the following table.

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| |xi+1xi| < ε
    0 0 0.2489 0.2489 N
    1 0.2489 0.2573 0.0084 N
    2 0.2573 0.2573 0.0000 Y
    xx3 = 0.2573

    If choosing x0 = b = 1, however, the similar iterative process produces a different solution of x = 1.3713 outside of the range [0, 1] after 6 iterations showing in the table below. If we plot f(x) beyond the range [0, 1], it shows that x = 1.3713 is another root of this equation (Figure 3). This is an 'abnormal case' or a special case for using Newton's method. This non-uniqueness is simply because the right end x = b = 1 is located closer to the root on its right and sharing the same ascending tendency in tangent to the right side of the curve. That is, the tangent of the left section is negative and approaches to root x = 0.2573 whereas the tangent of the right section is positive and approaches to the other root x = 1.3713.

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| |xi+1xi| < ε
    0 1.00000 2.02914 1.02914 N
    1 2.02914 1.60459 0.42454 N
    2 1.60459 1.41715 0.18745 N
    3 1.41715 1.37367 0.04347 N
    4 1.37367 1.37132 0.00236 N
    5 1.37132 1.37131 0.00001 Y
    xx6 = 1.3713

    Figure 3. 

    Two roots crossing the x-axis for equation f(x) = 0 in Example 2

    .

    Example 3: Solve equation cosxx=0 in [0, 1] with ε = 0.001 using Newton's method.

    Since f(a) = cos00=1 and f(b) = cosr(1)10.54031=0.4597, Newton's method can be used to solve this nonlinear equation.

    f(x)=cosxxf(xi)=cosxixi
    f(x)=sinx12x=(sinx+12x)f(xi)=(sinxi+12xi)=2xisinxi+12xi

    We can see the derivative at the left end x = a = 0 does not exist. Still using Formula (1),

    xi+1=xif(xi)f(xi)=xicosxixi2xisinxi+12xi=xi+2xi(cosxixi)2xisinxi+1.

    Let x0 = a = 0.

    x1=x0+2x0(cosx0x0)2x0sinx0+1=x0+01=x0.

    This means that the iteration does not progress if choosing the left endpoint as the initial point where f(0) does not exist.

    However, by choosing the right endpoint as the initial point, i.e., x0 = b = 1, the iteration converges to xx5 = 0.6419 showing in the table below. Note that the input value for trigonometric functions should be in radians.

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| |xi+1xi| < ε
    0 1.0000 0.6935 0.30647 N
    1 0.6935 0.6537 0.03986 N
    2 0.6537 0.6446 0.00905 N
    3 0.6446 0.6424 0.00219 N
    4 0.6424 0.6419 0.00054 Y
    xx5 = 0.6419

    Example 4: Solve equation f(x)=x2sinx=0 in [0.5, 1] using Newton's method with ε = 0.001.

    Since f(a) = f(0.5) = 0.25 – sinr0.5 ≈ 0.25 – 0.4794 = –0.2294 and f(b) = f(1) = 1 – sinr1 ≈ 1 – 0.8415 = 0.1585, Newton's method can be used to solve this nonlinear equation.

    f(x)=x2sinxf(xi)=x2isinxif(x)=(x2sinx)=2xcosxf(xi)=2xicosxi

    Formula (1) becomes

    xi+1=xif(xi)f(xi)=xix2isinxi2xicosxi.

    Letting x0 = b = 1, it takes 3 iterations to find an acceptable root xx3 = 0.8767 shown in the table below.

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| |xi+1xi| < ε
    0 1 0.89140 0.10860 N
    1 0.89140 0.87698 0.01442 N
    2 0.87698 0.87673 0.00025 Y
    xx3 = 0.8767

    The same solution can be reached by choosing x0 = a = 0.5. However, the convergence of the process would be much slower by taking 6 iterations to find the first acceptable root xx6 = 0.8767 shown in the table below. It can be clearly seen in the plot of this function (Figure 4) that the left endpoint x0 = a = 0.5 is near a local minimum on the curve where the tangent line is almost horizontal (green line) and its x-intercept is far beyond the right endpoint b = 1. In contrast, the tangent line from the right endpoint (blue line) x0 = b = 1 has a larger value for the gradient (or the derivative of the function), leading to an x-intercept closer to the root. Hence, it reaches the root faster than beginning from the left endpoint.

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| |xi+1xi| < ε
    0 0.50000 2.37412 1.87412 N
    1 2.37412 1.47028 0.90385 N
    2 1.47028 1.05948 0.41080 N
    3 1.05948 0.90583 0.15365 N
    4 0.90583 0.87771 0.02811 N
    5 0.87771 0.87673 0.00098 Y
    xx6 = 0.8767

    Figure 4. 

    The graph of the function in range [0.5, 1] in Example 4 (red) and the tangent line crossing the right endpoint (1, 0.1585) in blue and that crossing point (0.5, –0.2294) in green

    .

    This example is still a normal case for using Newton's method. However, it demonstrates that the speed of convergence in iteration heavily depends on the choice of the initial point.

    Example 5: Solve equation sinx1x+1=0 in [0, 1.5] with ε = 0.001 using Newton's method.

    Since f(a)=f(0)=sin010+1=1 and f(b)=f(1.5)=sinr1.511.5+10.5975, Newton's method can be used to solve this nonlinear equation.

    f(x)=sinx1x+1f(xi)=sinxi1xi+1f(x)=cosx+1(x+1)2f(xi)=cosxi+1(xi+1)2

    By formula (1) and choosing x0 = a = 0, it takes 4 iterations to find the first acceptable root xx4 = 0.6508 shown in the table below.

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| |xi+1xi| < ε
    0 0.0000 0.5000 0.50000 N
    1 0.5000 0.6416 0.14163 N
    2 0.6416 0.6507 0.00908 N
    3 0.6507 0.6508 0.00004 Y
    xx4 = 0.6508

    Choosing x0 = b = 1.5, however, the process does not converge. Each iteration produced x-intercept outside the confined range [0, 1.5] shown in the table below.

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| |xi+1xi| < ε
    0 1.5000 -1.0895 2.58950 N
    1 -1.0895 -1.1716 0.08210 N
    2 -1.1716 -1.3144 0.14284 N
    3 -1.3144 -1.5279 0.21345 N

    Observing the curve of this function (red line) and the tangent line crossing the right end (1.5, 0.5975) shown as the blue line in Figure 5, its initial x-intercept projects to the negative half outside of the range, further away from the solution around x = 0.65. The divergence of the iterative process is caused by the small gradient of the tangent line at the right endpoint. If choosing another inner point, for instance x0 = 1, the gradient of the line crossing this point is larger (green line) and the process will converge to the same root after 4 iterations shown in the table below.

    Figure 5. 

    The graph of the function in range [0, 1.5] in Example 5 (red) and the tangent line crossing the right endpoint (1.5 0.5975) in blue and that crossing point (1, 0.3415) in green

    .

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| |xi+1xi| < ε
    0 1.0000 0.5679 0.43208 N
    1 0.5679 0.6479 0.07994 N
    2 0.6479 0.6507 0.00289 N
    3 0.6507 0.6508 0.00000 Y
    xx4 = 0.6508

    The examples presented in Section 3 were all from the worked samples and exercises in the tailored textbook, Essentials and Examples of Applied Mathematics (2nd ed) [6], for the preservice secondary-school mathematics teachers at CQU. Many of the problems with Newton's method were gradually exposed by either the teacher (also the author of the textbook) or students since 2020. The advice provided to students for dealing with those special issues was initially the same as the general suggestions made in other books, such as 'choosing the other endpoint if one endpoint did not work' or 'choosing a new point close to the endpoint if the end point did not work', or 'using a graph of the function to help choose the initial point'.

    However, a conversation on the matters of using Newton's method with one talented student in 2022 triggered further thinking about a general but practical strategy for dealing with such matters in using Newton's method. The student simply augured that any other method could be equally effective to find the acceptable root if we choose the initial point close enough to the 'true root' on the graph of the nonlinear equation or function within the range. If so, why should we still stick with Newton's method with the assistance of a graph?

    There are still difficulties in proving if a general rule exists as a specific guide to the users when encountering some of the difficulties in using Newton's method. Instead, a practical strategy is shared below to guide students and other users to choose the initial point to avoid encountering the difficulties exposed in Section 3 with Newton's method without plotting the nonlinear equation or function. This strategy is stated as follows:

    By meeting the condition that the continuous and differentiable nonlinear function f(x) within the range [a, b] has values at the two endpoints with opposite signs, it is recommended to choose the middle point of the range as the initial point to start the iterative process of Newton's method, i.e., x0 = (a + b)/2.

    The check of the values at the two endpoints with opposite signs ensures existence of at least one root within the given range [a, b] for a continuous and differentiable function. Of course, the smaller the range, the better the chance to find a unique root within the range. For example, in Example 2, only one root x = 0.2573 would be found if the range is defined as [0, 0.5].

    Strictly proving the correctness of this simple strategy is beyond the author's capability. However, ten problems, including the five questions presented in Section 3, have been solved by Newton's method using this strategy with a smaller error limit ε = 0.0001, along with the results from starting the process at the two endpoints as comparisons in the performances of Newton's method for solving these questions. The performance data in term of the number of iterations for all questions are summarized in Table 1. All the questions, the iterative processes and outcomes are detailed in Appendix A.

    Table 1. 

    Number of iterations to reach the first acceptable root using different initial points

    .
    x0 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10
    a 5 3 * 7 4 5 5 5 * 4
    b 5 # 7 4 + 4 4 4 4 5
    (a + b)/2 4 4 7 4 3 2 3 4 3 3
    #: Reached a different root shown in Example 2; *: Not progressing as the derivative was not defined at the point; +: Divergent as shown in Example 5.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    A few observations can be made from the data in Table 1. First, by choosing the middle point as the initial point, the iterative process of solving the ten nonlinear equations by Newton's method converged to the desired root within the range without the assistance of the graph of a function. Using the middle point to initiate the process, there is no difficult to find the desired root within the range for the four special cases where an endpoint did not work as expected for Newton's method.

    Second, in most cases, beginning with the middle point reaches the desired root with fewer iterations, or no slower than beginning from any of the two endpoints. This is because the middle point should be closer to the root than the endpoints in most cases, which in turn leads to reaching the root with fewer iterations. However, in cases where the solution is located near any of the two endpoints, like Example 2 where the root x = 0.2573 is near the left endpoint x = 0 and far away from the right endpoint x = 1.5, using the middle point as the initial point may be slightly slower than using the near endpoint in approaching the root.

    Hence, choosing the middle point of a defined range to initiate the iterative process for Newton's method seems a general and practical strategy to avoid the difficulties encountered in using the method to solve nonlinear equations. However, more work needs to be done to prove how far this strategy could be extended in dealing with various special cases in using Newton's method in the future.

    The ten nonlinear equations to which Newton's method was applied. The error limit is ε = 0.0001 for all questions.

    1. Solve equation f(x)=1xlnx=0 in [1,3].

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi|
    0 1.00000 1.50000 0.50000 3.00000 1.27812 1.72188 2.00000 1.74247 0.25753
    1 1.50000 1.73508 0.23508 1.27812 1.66320 0.38508 1.74247 1.76306 0.02059
    2 1.73508 1.76292 0.02783 1.66320 1.75929 0.09609 1.76306 1.76322 0.00017
    3 1.76292 1.76322 0.00031 1.75929 1.76322 0.00393 1.76322 1.76322 0.00000
    4 1.76322 1.76322 0.00000 1.76322 1.76322 0.00001

    2. Solve equation x32x+2=x+2 in [0, 1].

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi|
    0 0.00000 0.24889 0.24889 1.00000 2.02914 1.02914 0.50000 0.20877 0.29123
    1 0.24889 0.25728 0.00838 2.02914 1.60459 0.42454 0.20877 0.25654 0.04777
    2 0.25728 0.25730 0.00003 1.60459 1.41715 0.18745 0.25654 0.25730 0.00076
    3 1.41715 1.37367 0.04347 0.25730 0.25730 0.00000
    4 1.37367 1.37132 0.00236
    5 1.37132 1.37131 0.00001

    3. Solve equation cosxx=0 in [0, 1].

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi|
    0 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 1.00000 0.69353 0.30647 0.50000 0.59986 0.09986
    1 0.69353 0.65367 0.03986 0.59986 0.63080 0.03093
    2 0.65367 0.64462 0.00905 0.63080 0.63898 0.00818
    3 0.64462 0.64243 0.00219 0.63898 0.64104 0.00206
    4 0.64243 0.64189 0.00054 0.64104 0.64155 0.00051
    5 0.64189 0.64176 0.00013 0.64155 0.64167 0.00013
    6 0.64176 0.64173 0.00003 0.64167 0.64170 0.00003

    4. Solve equation f(x)=x2sinx=0 in [0.5, 1].

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi|
    0 0.50000 2.37412 1.87412 1.00000 0.89140 0.10860 0.75000 0.90507 0.15507
    1 2.37412 1.47028 0.90385 0.89140 0.87698 0.01441 0.90507 0.87766 0.02740
    2 1.47028 1.05948 0.41080 0.87698 0.87673 0.00026 0.87766 0.87673 0.00094
    3 1.05948 0.90583 0.15365 0.87673 0.87673 0.00000 0.87673 0.87673 0.00000
    4 0.90583 0.87771 0.02811
    5 0.87771 0.87673 0.00098
    6 0.87673 0.87673 0.00000

    5. Solve equation sinx1x+1=0 in [0, 1.5].

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi|
    0 0.00000 0.50000 0.50000 1.50000 -1.08950 2.58950 0.75000 0.64585 0.10415
    1 0.50000 0.64163 0.14163 -1.08950 -1.17160 0.08210 0.64585 0.65074 0.00489
    2 0.64163 0.65071 0.00908 -1.17160 -1.31444 0.14284 0.65074 0.65075 0.00001
    3 0.65071 0.65075 0.00004 -1.31444 -1.52789 0.21345

    6. Solve equation exx3=0 in [1,2].

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi|
    0 1.00000 1.74593 0.74593 2.00000 1.62607 0.37393 1.50000 1.50526 0.00526
    1 1.74593 1.53768 0.20825 1.62607 1.51397 0.11210 1.50526 1.50524 0.00002
    2 1.53768 1.50590 0.03177 1.51397 1.50529 0.00868
    3 1.50590 1.50524 0.00066 1.50529 1.50524 0.00005
    4 1.50524 1.50524 0.00000

    7. Solve equation x34x2+x7=0 in [3.5, 4.5].

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi|
    0 3.50000 4.48718 0.98718 4.50000 4.20388 0.29612 4.00000 4.17647 0.17647
    1 4.48718 4.20112 0.28606 4.20388 4.16430 0.03959 4.17647 4.16369 0.01278
    2 4.20112 4.16421 0.03691 4.16430 4.16362 0.00068 4.16369 4.16362 0.00007
    3 4.16421 4.16362 0.00059 4.16362 4.16362 0.00000
    4 4.16362 4.16362 0.00000

    8. Solve equation xex=x2+1 in [0, 1].

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi|
    0 0.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.79099 0.20901 0.50000 0.78894 0.28894
    1 1.00000 0.79099 0.20901 0.79099 0.74077 0.05022 0.78894 0.74060 0.04835
    2 0.79099 0.74077 0.05022 0.74077 0.73844 0.00233 0.74060 0.73844 0.00216
    3 0.74077 0.73844 0.00233 0.73844 0.73843 0.00000 0.73844 0.73843 0.00000
    4 0.73844 0.73843 0.00000

    9. Solve equation 3x1x+1=0 in [0, 1].

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi|
    0 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 1.00000 0.42582 0.57418 0.50000 0.52845 0.02845
    1 0.42582 0.52228 0.09646 0.52845 0.52895 0.00050
    2 0.52228 0.52892 0.00664 0.52895 0.52895 0.00000
    3 0.52892 0.52895 0.00003

    10. Solve equation 2sinx+1=2cosx in [0, π/2].

    i xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi| xi xi+1 |xi+1xi|
    0 0.00000 0.50000 0.50000 1.57080 0.07080 1.50000 0.78540 0.43184 0.35355
    1 0.50000 0.42495 0.07505 0.07080 0.47030 0.39950 0.43184 0.42404 0.00780
    2 0.42495 0.42403 0.00092 0.47030 0.42440 0.04590 0.42404 0.42403 0.00001
    3 0.42403 0.42403 0.00000 0.42440 0.42403 0.00037
    4 0.42403 0.42403 0.00000



    [1]

    Stewart, J., Calculus: Concepts and Contexts, 4th ed. 2019. Boston, USA: Cengage.

    [2]

    Trim, D., Calculus for Engineers. 4th ed. 2008, Toronto, Canada: Pearson.

    [3]

    Gillett, P., Calculus and Analytic Geometry. 1981, Toronto, Canada: D.C. Heath and Company.

    [4]

    Croft, A., Davison, R., Hargreaves, M. and Flint J., Engineering Mathematics, 5th ed. 2017, Harlow, UK: Pearson.

    [5]

    Haeussler, E.F., Paul, R.S. and Wood, R.J., Introductory Mathematical Analysis for Business, Economics and Life and Social Sciences, 13th ed. 2011. Boston, USA: Pearson.

    [6]

    Guo, W.W., Essentials and Examples of Applied Mathematics, 2nd ed. 2020, Melbourne, Australia: Pearson.

    [7]

    Wheatley, G., Applied Numerical Analysis, 7th ed. 2004, Boston, USA: Pearson.

    [8]

    Chapra, S.C., Applied Numerical Methods with MATLAB for Engineers and Scientists. 2005, Boston, USA: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

    [9]

    Sauer, T., Numerical Analysis, 2nd ed. 2014, Harlow, UK: Pearson.

    [10]

    Ypma, T.J., Historical development of the Newton–Raphson method. SIAM Review, 1995, 37(4): 531–551. https://doi.org/10.1137/1037125

    doi: 10.1137/1037125
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. William Guo, Solving problems involving numerical integration (I): Incorporating different techniques, 2023, 3, 2767-1925, 130, 10.3934/steme.2023009
  • Author's biography

    Dr. William Guo is a professor in mathematics education with Central Queensland University, Australia. He is specialized in teaching applied mathematics for both engineering and education students. His research interests include mathematics education, applied computing, data analysis and numerical modeling. He is a member of IEEE and Australian Mathematical Society

    Reader Comments
  • © 2022 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(1244) PDF downloads(65) Cited by(1)

Figures and Tables

Figures(5)  /  Tables(1)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog