Abstract
In this paper, we present three improvements to a three-point third order variant of Newton's method derived from the Simpson rule. The first one is a fifth order method using the same number of functional evaluations as the third order method, the second one is a four-point 10th order method and the last one is a five-point 20th order method. In terms of computational point of view, our methods require four evaluations (one function and three first derivatives) to get fifth order, five evaluations (two functions and three derivatives) to get 10th order and six evaluations (three functions and three derivatives) to get 20th order. Hence, these methods have efficiency indexes of 1.495, 1.585 and 1.648, respectively which are better than the efficiency index of 1.316 of the third order method. We test the methods through some numerical experiments which show that the 20th order method is very efficient.
1. Introduction
Newton's method has remained one of the best root-finding methods for solving nonlinear scalar equation In last 15 years, many higher order variants of Newton's method have been developed. One of the them is a third order variant developed by Hasanov et al. [1] by approximating an indefinite integral in the Newton theorem by Simpson's formula. This method is a three-point method requiring 1 function and 3 first derivative evaluations and has an efficiency index of which is lower than of the 1-point Newton method. Recently, the order of many variants of Newton's method have been improved using the same number of functional evaluations by means of weight functions (see [2,3,4,5,6,7] and the references therein).
In this work, we improve the order of the three-point variant from three to five using weight function. Using polynomial interpolation, we develop four-point 10th order and five-point 20th order methods. Finally, we test the efficiency of the methods through numerical experiments.
2. Developments of the Methods
Let define an Iterative Function (I.F.).
Definition 1. [8] If the sequence tends to a limit in such a way that
for , then the order of convergence of the sequence is said to be p, and C is known as the asymptotic error constant. If , or , the convergence is said to be linear, quadratic or cubic, respectively.
Let , then the relation
is called the error equation. The value of p is called the order of convergence of the method.
Definition 2. [9] The Efficiency Index is given by
where d is the total number of new function evaluations (the values of f and its derivatives) per iteration.
Let be determined by new information at .
No old information is reused. Thus,
Then ψ is called a multipoint I.F without memory.
Kung-Traub Conjecture [10]
Let ψ be an I.F. without memory with d evaluations. Then
where is the maximum order.
The second order Newton (also called Newton-Raphson) I.F. (2ndNR) is given by
The 2ndNR I.F. is a is 1-point I.F. with 2 functions evaluations and it satisfies the Kung-Traub conjecture .
Thus, .
The Newton I.F. can be constructed from its local linear model, of the function , which is the tangent drawn to the function at the current point x. The local linear model at x is
This local linear model can be interpreted from the viewpoint of the Newton Theorem:
Weerakoon and Fernando [11] showed that if the indefinite integral is approximated by the rectangle: , the Newton I.F. is obtained by setting .Hasanov et al. [1] obtained a new linear model
by approximating by Simpson's formula: .
Solving the new linear model, they obtained the implicit I.F.
Using the Newton I.F. to estimate in the first derivative by , they obtained the I.F.:
The I.F. is a special case of the Frontini-Sormani family of third order I.F.s from quadrature rule [12]. It was extended to systems of equations in [13]. However this I.F. is considered as inefficient. According to Kung-Traub conjecture, the optimal order of the I.F. with is eight. In fact, we can have optimal three-point eighth order I.F.s with 4 function evaluations or with 3 function and 1 first derivative evaluations (see [5,14] and the references therein).
However, we can achieve only a maximum of sixth order with I.F.s with 2 function and 2 first derivative evaluations. The question we now pose: What is the maximum order we can achieve with I.F.s with 1 function and 3 first derivative evaluations?
Let us define . We improve the I.F. using weight function to obtain a three-point fifth order I.F. ():
It is remarkable that with the same number of functional evaluations we have improved the efficiency index from to . However, the maximum order we could achieve I.F.s with 1 function and 3 first derivative evaluations is five. Babajee [2] developed a technique to improve the order of old methods.
Theorem 3 (Babajee's theorem for improving the order of old methods). [2] Let a sufficiently smooth function has a simple root in the open interval D. Let be an Iteration Function (I.F.) of order p. Then the I.F. defined as is of local convergence of order if G is a function satisfying the error equation
where is a constant.
Suppose that the error equation of the old I.F. is given by
Then, the error equation of the new I.F. is given by
where .
Usually, G is a weight function or an approximation to obtained from polynomial interpolation.
Using Babajee's theorem and applying Newton I.F., we obtain a 10th order I.F. (10thVS):
However, we need to compute two more function evaluations. So we estimate by the following polynomial:
which satisfies the following conditions
Let
where we define the divided differences:
Equation (14) reduces, after using the divided differences, to a system of 3 linear equations in matrix form:
whose solutions are given by
So, .
Using Babajee's theorem with , we can obtain a four-point 10th-order I.F.s (10th4pVS):
The efficiency index has now increased since with 2 function and 3 first derivative evaluations. We point out that the optimal order of a four-point I.F. with 5 functional evaluations is 16 but this can be achieved with either 5 function evaluations or 4 function and 1 first derivative evaluations (see [5,14] and the references therein).
Using a similar approach to estimate by the following polynomial:
which satisfies the following conditions
Furthermore, let . Equation (17) reduces, after using the divided differences, to a system of 4 linear equations in matrix form:
whose solutions are given by
So,
Furthermore, using Babajee's theorem with , we can obtain a five-point 20th-order I.F.s (20th5pVS):
The efficiency index has now increased to with 2 function and 3 first derivative evaluations.
3. Convergence Analysis
Theorem 4. Let a sufficiently smooth function has a simple root in the open interval D which contains as an initial approximation to . Then the I.F (11) is of local fifth-order convergence , the I.F (15) is of local 10th-order convergence and the I.F (18) is of local 20th-order convergence.
Proof. Let .
Using the Taylor series and the symbolic software such as Maple we have
and
so that
Now
so that
and
Now, using Maple, we have
Using Babajee's theorem with , we have
Using Maple,
Using Babajee's theorem with , we have
4. Numerical Examples
In this section, we give numerical results on some test functions to compare the efficiency of the proposed methods (5th3pVS, 10th4pVS and 20th5pVS) with 3rd3pVS and Newton's method (2ndNR). Numerical computations have been carried out in the MATLAB software rounding to 1000 significant digits. Depending on the precision of the computer, we use the stopping criteria for the iterative process where . Let N be the number of iterations required for convergence. The test functions and their simple zeros are given below:
Table 1 shows the corresponding results for to . It can be found that the 20th5pVS I.F. converge in less iterations with the least error for the functions and their starting points considered. This I.F. takes at most half the number of iterations than that of the I.F. to converge. The number of iterations and the error are smaller when we choose a starting point close to the root.
Table 1.
Results for the 5th3pVS, 10th4pVS and 20th5pVS Iterative Functions (I.F.s) for - along with and 3rd3pVS I.F.s
| N | N | N | N | N | |||||||
| 7 | 1.09e-074 | 5 | 2.58e-094 | 4 | 1.04e-111 | 3 | 6.96e-077 | 3 | 3.31e-299 | ||
| 7 | 9.07e-061 | 5 | 1.65e-076 | 4 | 9.04e-095 | 3 | 8.96e-068 | 3 | 5.99e-249 | ||
| 7 | 7.80e-063 | 5 | 2.07e-079 | 4 | 5.53e-097 | 3 | 2.53e-080 | 3 | 9.88e-324 | ||
| 8 | 3.21e-053 | 6 | 1.29e-100 | 5 | 1.01e-173 | 4 | 2.57e-302 | 3 | 1.024e-125 | ||
| 7 | 7.80e-066 | 5 | 3.63e-083 | 4 | 1.62e-102 | 3 | 4.90e-071 | 3 | 1.18e-282 | ||
| 8 | 4.34e-073 | 6 | 6.08e-138 | 5 | 2.24e-144 | 4 | 7.38 e-190 | 3 | 3.88e-092 | ||
| 6 | 1.41e-067 | 4 | 5.59e-057 | 4 | 9.12e-222 | 3 | 1.08e-108 | 3 | 0 | ||
| 2 | 7 | 1.52e-062 | 5 | 8.42e-087 | 4 | 1.38e-069 | 4 | 9.78e-238 | 3 | 3.70e-123 | |
5. Conclusion
In this work, we have developed three-point fifth order, four-point 10th order and five-point 20th order methods using weight functions and polynomial interpolation. It is clear that our proposed methods require only four evaluations per iterative step to obtain fifth order method, five evaluations per iterative step to get 10th order and six evaluations per iterative step to get 20th order. We have thus increased the order of convergence to five, 10 and 20 compared to the third order method suggested in [1] with efficiency indexes EI =1.495, EI =1.585 and EI = 1.648, respectively. Our proposed methods are better than Newton's method in terms of efficiency index (EI =1.4142). Numerical results show that the five-point 20th order method is the most efficient.
Acknowledgments
The author is thankful to the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments to improve the readability of the paper.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflict of interest.
References
- Hasanov, V.I.; Ivanov, I.G.; Nedzhibov, G.H. A new modification of Newton's method. Appl. Math. Eng. 2002, 27, 278–286. [Google Scholar]
- Babajee, D.K.R. Several improvements of the 2-point third order midpoint iterative method using weight functions. Appl. Math. Comput. 2012, 218, 7958–7966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Babajee, D.K.R. On a two-parameter Chebyshev-Halley-like family of optimal two-point fourth order methods free from second derivatives. Afr. Mat. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Babajee, D.K.R.; Jaunky, V.C. Applications of higher-order optimal Newton Secant iterative methods in ocean acidification and investigation of long-run implications of CO2 emissions on alkalinity of seawater. ISRN Appl. Math. 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Babajee, D.K.R.; Thukral, R. On a 4-point sixteenth-order King family of iterative methods for solving nonlinear equations. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharifi, M.; Babajee, D.K.R.; Soleymani, F. Finding solution of nonlinear equations by a class of optimal methods. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012, 63, 764–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soleymani, F.; Khratti, S.K.; Karimi Vanani, S. Two new classes of optimal Jarratt-type fourth-order methods. Appl. Math. Lett. 2011, 25, 847–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wait, R. The Numerical Solution of Algebraic Equations; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1979. [Google Scholar]
- Ostrowski, A.M. Solutions of Equations and System of Equations; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 1960. [Google Scholar]
- Kung, H.T.; Traub, J.F. Optimal order of one-point and multipoint iteration. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 1974, 21, 643–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weerakoon, S.; Fernando, T.G.I. A variant of Newton's method with accelerated third order convergence. Appl. Math. Lett. 2000, 13, 87–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frontini, M.; Sormani, E. Some variants of Newton's method with third-order convergence. Appl. Math. Comput. 2003, 140, 419–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cordero, A.; Torregrosa, J.R. Variants of Newton's method using fifth-order quadrature formulas. Appl. Math. Comput. 2007, 190, 686–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cordero, A.; Hueso, J.L.; Martinez, E.; Torregrosa, J.R. Generating optimal derivative free iterative methods for nonlinear equations by using polynomial interpolation. Appl. Math. Comput. 2013, 57, 1950–1956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2015 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).