everybody, I'm studying different methods like bisection, secant, newton and Regula_Falsi. For another application, I need to know the convergence factor of these methods. Searching online I saw that for the method of bisection it corresponds to $1/2$, for the Regula-Falsi $\frac{1+\sqrt{5}}{2}$. I found no explicit values for the other methods. Could you help me understand why? Is there any way to calculate these corresponding values for the other methods? A formula would be good too. Since I have to use these values in a Python code, I could use the formula to calculate them on the fly.
-
2Newton's method is analyzed here. The secant method is analyzed here in greater than usual detail. – Carl Christian Feb 24 '20 at 15:52
2 Answers
It seems you are confusing order/rate of convergence. See here for the definition. Intuitively, they can be understand by considering the amount of digits accurate per iteration. Let $d_n$ be the digits accurate of the estimate. Usually, $d_n$ behaves an approximate recurrence of the form
$$d_{n+1}\simeq qd_n+r$$
where $q$ is the order of convergence and $r$ is (related to) the rate of convergence. Initially the rate of convergence matters the most when $d_n$ is small, while for large $d_n$ the order of convergence will matter more.
The orders and rates of convergence for each of the stated methods is given by:
$$\begin{array}{c|c|c|c|c}&\rm Bisection&\rm Regula~Falsi&\rm Secant&\rm Newton\\\hline\rm Order&1&1&\frac{1+\sqrt5}2&2\\\hline\rm Rate&\frac12&-\frac{f''(x)}{2f'(x)}(x-z)&-\frac{f''(x)}{2f'(x)}&-\frac{f''(x)}{2f'(x)}\end{array}\\\small\text{$z$ denotes the second point used in Regula-Falsi}$$
Bisection is very easy to prove, since the interval always halves. The rates of convergence for the other methods are all mostly the same, since $-f''(x)/2f'(x)$ is a measurement of the curvature of $f$, or more precisely how accurate a linear approximation of the function is. The differences in their orders of convergence, however, is more complicated. In essence, they rely on the fact that the equation
$$y-\frac{f(y)(y-z)}{f(y)-f(z)}$$
estimates the root $x$ with error given by
$$-\frac{f''(x)}{2f'(x)}(x-y)(x-z)$$
In the case of regula falsi, either $x-y$ or $x-z$ remains constant. Letting the constant one be $x-z$, the error reduces down to
$$\underbrace{-\frac{f''(x)}{2f'(x)}(x-z)}_\text{(rate)}(x-y)^{1~(\text{order})}$$
In the case of the secant method, both $y$ and $z$ approach the root, leading to $\log|x-y|$ growing similarly to that of the Fibonacci sequence, which can be solved to give an order of convergence of $\varphi=(1+\sqrt5)/2$, the golden ratio.
In the case of Newton's method, $z\to y$ is used, leaving us with
$$\underbrace{-\frac{f''(x)}{2f'(x)}}_\text{(rate)}(x-y)^{2~(\text{order})}$$

- 74,685
When Newton's method converges for a typical problem, it exhibits $q$-quadratic convergence, i.e., $$ \|e_{n+1}\|\propto \|e_{n}\|^2, $$ where $e_k$ is the error at the $k$-th iteration. However, there are many things that can change this rate of convergence such as a near-singular derivative at the solution, which results in $q$-linear convergence (if you're lucky). If your second derivative is $0$ at the solution, then you may get $q$-cubic convergence. However, if your initial guess is in a bad place (bad is technical to define), then the iteration may not converge at all.

- 5,530
-
Linear, quadratic and cubic convergence are standard terms which are well-defined. What is the significance of the prefix $q$, as in $q$-linear, $q$-quadratic and $q$-cubic? – Carl Christian Feb 24 '20 at 16:07
-
The $q$ stands for quotient, which is chosen because the order of convergence is estimated by comparing the logarithm of successive quotients of errors. It is meant to distinguish from linear or quadratic convergence in other situations, which often means $|e_n| = O(n^{-2})$, for instance, which is significantly difference from the case with Newton's method. There are more details on here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rate_of_convergence – whpowell96 Feb 24 '20 at 17:02
-
I was happy to browse Potra's paper, thank you for the reference.Personally, I believe that we should avoid using non-standard terms when answering elementary questions. – Carl Christian Feb 25 '20 at 09:06