Basin attractors for various methods
dc.contributor.author | Scott, Melvin | |
dc.contributor.author | Neta, Beny | |
dc.contributor.author | Chun, Changbum | |
dc.date | 2011 | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2014-03-12T22:47:49Z | |
dc.date.available | 2014-03-12T22:47:49Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2011 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10945/39427 | |
dc.description | Applied Mathematics and Computation, 218, (2011), 2584–2599. | en_US |
dc.description | The article of record as published may be located at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2011.07.076. | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | There are many methods for the solution of a nonlinear algebraic equation. The methods are classified by the order, informational efficiency and efficiency index. Here we consider other criteria, namely the basin of attraction of the method and its dependence on the order. We discuss several methods of various orders and present the basin of attraction for several examples. It can be seen that not all higher order methods were created equal. Newton’s, Halley’s, Murakami’s and Neta–Johnson’s methods are consistently better than the others. In two of the examples Neta’s 16th order scheme was also as good. | en_US |
dc.rights | This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States. | en_US |
dc.title | Basin attractors for various methods | en_US |
dc.contributor.department | Applied Mathematics | en_US |
dc.subject.author | Basin of attraction | en_US |
dc.subject.author | Iterative methods | en_US |
dc.subject.author | Simple roots | en_US |
dc.subject.author | Nonlinear equations | en_US |