Java - Simpson's method and error - java

I am writing a Java program for Simpson's method. The basic program works as expected, although I cannot get the (absolute) error part to work.
I think I need to reference my while (absError < 0.000001) loop differently. What am I doing wrong?
First try
public static double function(double x, double s) {
double sech = 1 / Math.cosh(x); // Hyperbolic cosecant
double squared = Math.pow(sech, 2);
return ((Math.pow(x, s)) * squared);
}
// Simpson's rule - Approximates the definite integral of f from a to b.
public static double SimpsonsRule(double a, double b, double s, int n) {
double dx, x, sum4x, sum2x;
double absError = 1.0;
double simpson = 0.0;
double simpson2 = 0.0;
dx = (b-a) / n;
sum4x = 0.0;
sum2x = 0.0;
// 4/3 terms
for (int i = 1; i < n; i += 2) {
x = a + i * dx;
sum4x += function(x,s);
}
// 2/3 terms
for (int i = 2; i < n-1; i += 2) {
x = a + i * dx;
sum2x += function(x,s);
}
// Compute the integral approximation.
simpson = function(a,s) + function(a,b);
simpson = (dx / 3)*(simpson + 4 * sum4x + 2 * sum2x);
while ( absError < 0.000001)
{
simpson2 = SimpsonsRule(a, b, s, n);
absError = Math.abs(simpson2 - simpson) / 15;
simpson = simpson2;
n++;
}
System.out.println("Number of intervals is " + n + ".");
return simpson2;
}
This doesn't work since I did not write
simpson2 = SimpsonsRule(a, b, s, n);
correctly.
I tried doing this a second way, but the solution ultimately also fails.
public static double function(double x, double s) {
double sech = 1 / Math.cosh(x); // Hyperbolic cosecant
double squared = Math.pow(sech, 2);
return ((Math.pow(x, s)) * squared);
}
// Simpson's rule - Approximates the definite integral of f from a to b.
public static double SimpsonsRule(double a, double b, double s, int n) {
double dx, x, sum4x, sum2x;
double absError = 1.0;
double simpson = 0.0;
double simpson2 = 0.0;
dx = (b-a) / n;
sum4x = 0.0;
sum2x = 0.0;
// 4/3 terms
for (int i = 1; i < n; i += 2) {
x = a + i * dx;
sum4x += function(x,s);
}
// 2/3 terms
for (int i = 2; i < n-1; i += 2) {
x = a + i * dx;
sum2x += function(x,s);
}
// Compute the integral approximation.
simpson = function(a,s) + function(a,b);
simpson = (dx / 3)*(simpson + 4 * sum4x + 2 * sum2x);
while ( absError < 0.000001)
{
n++;
dx = (b-a) / n;
// 4/3 terms
for (int i = 1; i < n; i += 2) {
x = a + i * dx;
sum4x += function(x,s);
}
// 2/3 terms
for (int i = 2; i < n-1; i += 2) {
x = a + i * dx;
sum2x += function(x,s);
}
simpson = function(a,s) + function(a,b);
simpson2 = (dx / 3)*(simpson + 4 * sum4x + 2 * sum2x);
absError = Math.abs(simpson2 - simpson) / 15;
simpson = simpson2;
}
System.out.println("Number of intervals is " + n + ".");
return simpson2;
}
I need to write the while loop differently. What is wrong with the way the error is referenced inside the while loop?
The java code up until
while ( absError < 0.000001)
{
simpson2 = SimpsonsRule(a, b, s, n);
absError = Math.abs(simpson2 - simpson) / 15;
simpson = simpson2;
n++;
}
System.out.println("Number of intervals is " + n + ".");
return simpson2;
Works fine and correctly calculates Simpson's method.

Looks like your Simpson's method implementation is not converging. The easiest thing you can do to avoid infinite cycle in while - you have to add another condition - maximum number of iterations.
Something like that:
int n = 0;
while (error < ACCURACY && n++ < MAX_ITERATIONS) {
// while body
}
where ACCURACY is 0.000001 in your case (or 1e-6) and MAX_ITERATIONS is an integer constant, for example 100000 or 1e+6.
Why your algorithm is not converging - this is another question - look carefully on your formulas - use debugging tools. Good luck!

I fixed it. Thanks for your help.
// Simpson's rule - Approximates the definite integral of f from a to b.
public static double SimpsonsRule(double a, double b, double s, int n) {
double simpson, dx, x, sum4x, sum2x;
dx = (b-a) / n;
sum4x = 0.0;
sum2x = 0.0;
// 4/3 terms
for (int i = 1; i < n; i += 2) {
x = a + i * dx;
sum4x += function(x,s);
}
// 2/3 terms
for (int i = 2; i < n-1; i += 2) {
x = a + i * dx;
sum2x += function(x,s);
}
// Compute the integral approximation.
simpson = function(a,s) + function(a,b);
simpson = (dx / 3)*(simpson + 4 * sum4x + 2 * sum2x);
return simpson;
}
// Handles the error for for f(x) = t^s * sech(t)^2. The integration is
// done from 0 to 100.
// Stop Simspson's Method when the relative error is less than 1 * 10^-6
public static double SimpsonError(double a, double b, double s, int n)
{
double futureVal;
double absError = 1.0;
double finalValueOfN;
double numberOfIterations = 0.0;
double currentVal = SimpsonsRule(a,b,s,n);
while (absError / currentVal > 0.000001) {
n = 2*n;
futureVal = SimpsonsRule(a,b,s,n);
absError = Math.abs(futureVal - currentVal) / 15;
currentVal = futureVal;
}
// Find the number of iterations. N starts at 8 and doubles every iteration.
finalValueOfN = n / 8;
while (finalValueOfN % 2 == 0) {
finalValueOfN = finalValueOfN / 2;
numberOfIterations++;
}
System.out.println("The number of iterations is " + numberOfIterations + ".");
return currentVal;
}

Related

Simpson's double integral won't work in java

So I had to write an algorithm for the Simpson's double integral so I can find the answer in a much faster manner. I had a guide that showed the steps to follow to write this program. After following this guide and running it in netbeans, I found out that the values coming out of the program where not really close to the real answer. This is the code that I written in java:
//INPUT
double a = 0,b = 1; // Endpoints
int m = 8,n = 4;
double K1 = 0, K2 = 0, K3 = 0;
//OUPUT
//Step 1
double h = (b - a) / n;
double j1 = 0; //End terms
double j2 = 0; //Even terms
double j3 = 0; //Odd terms
//Step 2
for(int i = 0; i <= n; i++){
//Step 3
double x = a + (i * h);
double hX = (d(x) - c(x)) / m;
K1 = f(x, c(x)) + f(x, d(x)); // End terms
//Step 4
for (int j = 1; j < (m-1); j++){
//Step 5
double y = c(x) + (j * hX);
double q = f(x,y);
//Step 6
if (j % 2 == 0){
K2 = K2 + q;
}
else
K3 = K3 + q;
}
//Step 7
double l = (K1 + (2*K2) + (4*K3)) * (hX / 3);
//Step 8
if (i == 0 || i == n)
j1 = j1 + l;
else if (i % 2 == 0)
j2 = j2 + l;
else
j3 = j3 + l;
}
double j = h * (j1 + (2 * j2) + (4 * j3)) / 3;
System.out.println("j = " + j);
}
public static double c(double x){
return x;
}
public static double d(double x){
return 2 * x;
}
public static double f(double x, double y){
return (Math.pow(y, 2) + Math.pow(x, 3));
}
I tried debugging the program several times but I haven't yet found why I am encountering this mistake. If there's any mistake that you find in my code please let me know to see if it fixes it. For the given example, I am getting the value of 0.9069281684027777 instead of having the correct value which is 0.7838542. Thank you for your help. You can also see the guide that I followed to be able to create this program.
I did not check the math, the large error seems to indicate an error in the algorithm implemented. The for-bounds are dubious. And floating point errors exist.
Instead of multiplying a fraction by a running index (which would multiply the floating point approximation error in the fraction), better do:
Instead:
double h = (b - a) / n;
for (int i = 0; i <= n; i++) {
double x = a + (i * h);
do
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
double x = a + i * (b - a) / n;
or
for (int i = 0; i <= n; i++) {
double x = a + i * (b - a) / (n + 1);
The boundary n being a bit unclear to me.

points of intersection by determinate not working

I have unfinished code to find the points of intersection of all lines that are perpendicular. So far I have this:
import java.util.Scanner;
public class CountSquares {
public static void main(String args[]) {
Scanner scan = new Scanner(System.in);
int lines = scan.nextInt();
scan.nextLine();
double[][] lineMXYC = new double[4][lines]; // stores the slope, and x
// and y co-ordinates and c
// so the line can be
// represented as y = mx + c
double x1 = 0.0, x2 = 0.0, y1 = 0.0, y2 = 0.0;
double slope = 0.0;
for (int i = 0; i < lines; i++) {
String input = scan.nextLine();
String[] arrayOfInput = input.split(" ");
x1 = Integer.parseInt(arrayOfInput[0]);
y1 = Integer.parseInt(arrayOfInput[1]);
x2 = Integer.parseInt(arrayOfInput[2]);
y2 = Integer.parseInt(arrayOfInput[3]);
if (x1 == x2)
slope = Double.POSITIVE_INFINITY;
else
slope = (y2 - y1) / (x2 - x1);
lineMXYC[0][i] = slope;
lineMXYC[1][i] = x1;
lineMXYC[2][i] = y1;
lineMXYC[3][i] = y1 - (slope * x1);
}
for (int j = 0; j < lines - 1; j++) { //sorts the array by slopes
if (lineMXYC[0][j] > lineMXYC[0][j + 1]) {
double TEMP = lineMXYC[0][j + 1];
lineMXYC[0][j + 1] = lineMXYC[0][j];
lineMXYC[0][j] = TEMP;
}
}
double[] pointsOfIntersectionX = new double[(int) (lines * lines / 4) + 1]; //max number of points there can be
double[] pointsOfIntersectionY = new double[(int) (lines * lines / 4) + 1];
int count = 0;
for (int k = 0; k < lines; k++) {
for (int n = k; n < lines; n++) {
System.out.println(n + " " + k);
if (1 / lineMXYC[0][k] == -lineMXYC[0][n]) {
double m1 = lineMXYC[0][k];
double m2 = lineMXYC[0][n];
double c1 = lineMXYC[3][k];
double c2 = lineMXYC[3][n];
System.out.println("m1: "+m1);
System.out.println("m2: "+m2);
System.out.println("c1: "+c1);
System.out.println("c2: "+c2);
pointsOfIntersectionX[count] = (c1 - c2) / (m2 - m1); //determinate to find x co-ordinate
pointsOfIntersectionY[count] = (m2 * c1 - m1 * c2)
/ (m2 - m1);
System.out.println("The lines intersect at: ("
+ pointsOfIntersectionX[count] + ", "
+ pointsOfIntersectionY[count] + ")");
count++;
}
}
}
scan.close();
}
}
This will take in the number of lines, then two points on each line seperated by spaces. If I enter
2
3 -1 0 8
3 -1 0 -2
It works fine, finding the point (3, -1)
However, if I put in the same values reversed
2
3 -1 0 -2
3 -1 0 8
It gives me (-3.0, 6.999999999999999) which is wrong
What is going wrong with the code? I can't pinpoint where the problem comes from.
Sorting by slopes may mix your input data in your version.
If you want to swap the lines, swap all line data:
for (int j = 0; j < lines - 1; j++) { //sorts the array by slopes
if (lineMXYC[0][j] > lineMXYC[0][j + 1]) {
for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
double TEMP = lineMXYC[i][j + 1];
lineMXYC[i][j + 1] = lineMXYC[i][j];
lineMXYC[i][j] = TEMP;
}
}
}
If I may give you an advice:
make a separate Line class for better design
implement the compare method or a line comparator
use some sorting algorithm, the one you use will not sort correctly for more lines, e.g. see Java Tutorials

Infinite while loop in Java - Newton-Raphson method

Ok this code was in another question but I couldn't work out how to add my updated code. I got this code working and putting out the right answers but it isn't stopping according to my while loop conditions. i'm not sure what I've done wrong there? The answer clearly converges and all values are right, just while loop is ignored.
/* Newton Raphson Method*/
import java.util.Scanner;
import static java.lang.Math.*;
public class NewtRaphEx {
// Creating Function f = x - cos(3.5x)
double f = 0.0;
double df = 0.0;
public static double function(double x) {
return (x - cos(3.5 * x));
}
public static double dfunction (double x) {
return (1 + 3.5*sin(3.5 * x));
}
public static void main (String[] args) {
//Initialising all variables
double xn = 0.06;
double xnew = 0.0;
double e_allow = 0.001;
double fn = 0.0;
double eps = 0.0;
double dfn = 0.0;
double dx = 0.0;
int n = 0;
int nMax = 10000;
do {
for (n = 0; n <= nMax; n++) {
fn = function(xn);
dfn = dfunction(xn);
dx = -(fn / dfn);
xnew = xn + dx;
xn = xnew;
eps = abs(dx / xn);
n = n + 1;
}
} while (eps <= e_allow || n < nMax);
System.out.print("N" + "\t" + "X" + "\t" + "F(x)" + "\t" + "dF(x)" + "\t");
System.out.println("delX" + "\t" + "X_new" + "\t" + "Epsilon");
System.out.format("%d\t" + "%.3f\t" + "%.3f\t" + "%.3f\t" + "%.3f\t" + "%.3f\t" + "%.3f", n, xn, fn, dfn, dx, xnew, eps);
}
}
The expression
eps <= e_allow || n < nMax
evaluates to true when you reach it, therefore the for loop will run again, setting n = 0 and thus the infinite loop.
Specifically, you would have:
eps = 0.0;
e_allow = 0.001;
n = 10002; // due to the increment inside the loop
nmax = 10000;
as as such:
eps <= e_allow || n < nMax
0.0 <= 0.001 (true) OR 10002 <= 10000 (false) -> true

Diophantine reciprocals III find output?

Diophantine reciprocals III
In the following equation x, y, and n are positive integers.
1/x + 1/y = 1/n
For a limit L we define F(L) as the number of solutions which satisfy x < y ≤ L.
We can verify that F(15) = 4 and F(1000) = 1069.
Find F(10^12).
The equation is equivalent to z = xy/(x + y). Let d = gcd(x, y). Then
x = dm, y = dn, with gcd(m, n) = 1.
It follows that gcd(mn, m + n) = 1 so that
z = dmn / (m + n),
which implies (m + n) | d, i.e., d = k(m + n), k a positive integer.
Thus we obtain the solutions:
x = km(m + n), y = kn(m + n), z = kmn,
where the three parameters k, m, n are positive integers.
For I/p=15 I am getting o/p=4 & for I/p=1000 I am getting o/p=1069 in 18sec but for I/p=10^12 no o/p is being displayed. How to handle such huge I/p?​
public class testClient {
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(diophantineReciprocals(1000.0));
}
private static double diophantineReciprocals(double L) {
double noOfSolutions = 0;
double d = 1;
double m = 1;
double n = 1;
double z = 0;
for (double x = 1; x < L; x++) {
for (double y = x + 1; y <= L; y++) {
d = gcd(x, y);
m = x / d;
n = y / d;
x = d * m;
y = d * n;
z = m * n * d / (m + n);
if (/* z == (x * y) / (x + y) && */Math.round(z) != 0
&& (z - Math.round(z)) == 0) {
noOfSolutions++;
}
}
}
return noOfSolutions;
}
private static double gcd(double x, double y) {
double gcd = 1;
for (double i = 2; i <= x; i++) {
if (x % i == 0 && y % i == 0) {
if (i > gcd) {
gcd = i;
}
}
}
return gcd;
}
}

Multiplying and Dividing by Two

Why are these two snippets of code giving two different results?
double sum = 1.0;
double xSqFour = x * x / 4;
for (int i = 48; i > 1; i-=2) {
sum = 1.0 + (xSqFour / ((i/2) * (i/2))) * sum;
}
return sum;
and
double sum = 1.0;
double xSqFour = x * x / 4;
for (int i = 24; i > 1; i--) {
sum = 1.0 + (xSqFour / (i * i)) * sum;
}
return sum;
You have a bounds error on your second loop. It should be i > 0. The first loop has i > 1, but it also divides i by 2. 1 / 2 == 0, so it should be i > 0 in the second loop.

Categories

Resources