mersenneforum.org > Math Calculating a difficult sum
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2009-08-25, 03:12 #1 CRGreathouse     Aug 2006 3×19×103 Posts Calculating a difficult sum What are good ways to numerically calculate integrals? Background (skip, skim, or read depending on your patience): I was trying to estimate the value of a difficult arithmetic sum recently and I'm not quite sure how to go about it. The summands are ~ 1/xlog^2 x and so clearly converge, but a finite sum as far as I was able to manage (a few million terms, though I could reach a billion with a bit more time) aren't enough to get a value I can trust to even two decimal places, and it's surely meaningless beyond four. The obvious next step was to take the sum as far as I cared to go and use an integral for the rest. Fortunately the terms are just well-behaved enough that I have viable upper and lower bounds. With some effort I managed to generate three integrals that give upper and lower bounds (the lower bound is two piecewise integrals). So I typed all this up in my programming language of choice and wrote a wrapper function that let me set precision and how far to set the sum/integral cutoff. It was only then that I realized that the integral was apparently rather numerically unstable -- even though the bounding functions were smooth in the domain of consideration. Every time I raised the precision I got a new answer, to the limit of my patience. My best though so far was to subtract the main term 1/xlog^2 x out of the integral, since it has closed-form integral -1/log x. But this hasn't helped much so far.I'm just looking for general strategies, either better ways to calculate the integrals or a different approach to the sum. Because the sum includes primes it's a pain to work with numerically... but Pierre Dusart's bounds are tight enough at large numbers that I think I can make the integral approach work. But first I have to know that what I think is the integral is, in fact, the integral! Last fiddled with by CRGreathouse on 2009-08-25 at 03:12
 2009-08-25, 04:50 #2 flouran     Dec 2008 83310 Posts Why not evaluate the integrals formulaically using an implementation of Risch's algorithm (although Cherry's algorithmic extension to Rich's result seems more practical; but, as you know, that's not saying much ), and then evaluate the resulting formula numerically at the points you want? If I interpret Cherry's paper correctly (which you gave me 4 months ago), he does implement his algorithm in Macsyma. Is Mathematica able to compute this integral (I know, it's a dumb question; but it's worth a shot)? Last fiddled with by flouran on 2009-08-25 at 04:52
 2009-08-25, 05:05 #3 CRGreathouse     Aug 2006 3×19×103 Posts Neither Mathematica nor Maxima can evaluate the integral in closed form. That's not surprising: most integrals can't be, and I wouldn't have posted if it could have been.
 2009-08-25, 14:11 #4 wblipp     "William" May 2003 New Haven 2×32×131 Posts Sometimes a change of variable in the integral helps. The integral convergence may be the same problem as the summation convergence - the integrand decreases so slowly that you need to keep extending the range of integration. The idea is to get a new integration variable that rapidly covers ranges of the old integration variable. Perhaps z = log x. William

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post dchmelik Software 3 2017-10-25 06:33 Oddball Lounge 2 2010-05-06 02:18 Damian Math 31 2008-10-03 02:11 Unregistered Homework Help 9 2008-10-01 21:24 hyh1048576 Puzzles 6 2003-07-27 06:46

All times are UTC. The time now is 20:57.

Fri Aug 14 20:57:28 UTC 2020 up 1 day, 17:33, 1 user, load averages: 1.55, 1.65, 1.63