Writing a coursework, especially one on a complex topic like C3 Coursework Numerical Methods,

can be a challenging and time-consuming task. Students often find themselves grappling with
intricate mathematical concepts, extensive research, and the need for precision in presenting their
findings. Here are some reasons why writing such coursework can be difficult:

1. Complexity of Numerical Methods: C3 Coursework Numerical Methods involves the

application of various mathematical techniques to solve problems. Implementing these
methods accurately requires a deep understanding of mathematical principles and their
practical applications.
2. Extensive Research: Students may need to delve into academic journals, textbooks, and
other resources to gather relevant information for their coursework. This can be time-
consuming and requires a good grasp of the subject matter.
3. Mathematical Modeling: Creating mathematical models and algorithms to address specific
problems is a crucial aspect of numerical methods coursework. Developing these models
accurately demands a high level of mathematical proficiency.
4. Data Analysis and Interpretation:Numerical methods often involve extensive data analysis.
Interpreting the results and drawing meaningful conclusions can be challenging, requiring
both analytical and critical thinking skills.
5. Time Constraints: Students often face tight deadlines when working on coursework.
Managing time effectively is essential to thoroughly research, plan, and execute the
coursework, adding to the overall difficulty of the task.

Given these challenges, it's not uncommon for students to seek assistance. If you find yourself
struggling with your C3 Coursework Numerical Methods or any other coursework, one option is to
consider professional help. Services like ⇒ HelpWriting.net ⇔ may provide valuable support by
offering assistance with research, analysis, and structuring your coursework. However, it's essential
to approach such services with caution and ensure that they adhere to ethical standards and academic
integrity.

Remember that seeking help doesn't necessarily mean outsourcing the entire coursework. It can also
involve getting guidance, clarifying doubts, or seeking assistance on specific challenging aspects.
Always prioritize your own understanding and academic growth while seeking external support.
For example sing the same rearrangement of the equation to find the root between 5 and 6 using 5 as
the starting point, the iterations converge on the root between 1 and 2. Can you get an A in A-Level
Maths just by working hard. This process is then repeated on the new x values until they converge on
the root to the required level of accuracy. In this case, would you re-arrange until you find a suitable
iteration formula that works. The fact that the solution lies between -3 and -4 can also be seen in the
graph. With the use of excel, it is every easy to write down the formula of the method in one cell and
dragging it down as many cells as you wish to (the number of iterations) and it is very easy to use.
This allowed me to work out that the three roots were between the integers of -4 and 1. This is
because the tangent crosses the asymptote, as shown below. The value of g(x) at this point is then
taken as the next guess and this process is repeated to converge on the root. Regarding the speed the
convergence, this is by far the fastest to converge to the root and it is also the method which fails the
least out of the three different methods. So using the Re- arrangement method to solve f(x), I find
that the root is - 1.961703555. With the use of AutoGraph Software, It is even easier as you don’t
even have to work out the gradient function. Then we look at where the tangent crosses the X axis
and that value will be the new x value on the graph for a tangent. However the need for much
manual computation can make the process quite laborious and time consuming. This makes it very
easy to work out the repetitive part of the method and makes the speed of convergence much faster.
Care must be taken when choosing a starting value and asymptotes can cause the method to fail. This
allowed me to work out that the three real roots of the function were between the integers of -1 and
7. So the only human interaction needed is to look at the results and manually looking at between
which two points (limits) there is a sign change and then setting the new limits as such. Below is the
Excel spread sheet with f(x n ) and its derivative, f’(x) shown. This is when the equation would have
been solved by using the quadratic formula, completing the square or by factorising it. As for the
speed of convergence, it would be slower that Newton Raphson because of the extra time needed to
re-arrange the equation but it is faster than Decimal search. But regarding the speed of convergence,
this is relatively low as it is not completely automated and requires human interaction after each set
of results and is very repetitive. Below is the Excel spread sheet with f(x n ) and its derivative, f’(x)
shown. Most of the mistakes are made in this stage by humans. I don't quite understand why the
question added the word negative in there when the root is located between a negative interval. With
the use of excel, it can be really easy to work out the values of y when you sub in the x values. So I
used the formula to work out the values in excel. This shows that generally the Newton-Raphson
method has a much quicker speed of convergence than the other two methods. To start the process,
we have to select two points on the graph visual basis. The value of g'(x) at this point is far greater
than 1, so the iterations do not converge.
In some cases you may not be able to differentiate f(x). As for the speed of convergence, it would be
slower that Newton Raphson because of the extra time needed to re-arrange the equation but it is
faster than Decimal search. Hopefully you should be able to get the value of the root starting from
anywhere - if you find it's not converging, first try a couple of different starting points, then try a
new iteration. If that g’(x) 1, then we know that the function will not converge to the root but will
diverge away. In some cases you may not be able to differentiate f(x). The diagram above shows that
the gradient of g(x) is within this range at the root which is found. This makes it very easy to work
out the repetitive part of the method and makes the speed of convergence much faster. The mark
scheme re-arranged to get a different iteration formula and got an approximation as 1.653 to 3
decimal places. Is this correct (and could you explain some of these higher-level concepts or would
they not make sense to me fully with the current knowledge I have? (A-level maths only) -------
Also, my other question is the following: a) show that the equation x 3. Most of the mistakes are
made in this stage by humans. This shows that generally the Newton-Raphson method has a much
quicker speed of convergence than the other two methods. In this case, would you re-arrange until
you find a suitable iteration formula that works. The value of g'(x) at this point is far greater than 1,
so the iterations do not converge. Also, my other question is the following: a) show that the equation
x 3. The Decimal search method enables you to get a very close approximate to the real solution but
more easily. Annoying Red Cheeks urgent query, I would really appreciate your help. For this
method, I will be using a different function to the other two. Using Autograph is much, much simpler
as you have the ability to zoom in on the point where the signs change, i.e. the point on the X-axis,
and can do so to many places. Some computer programs, such as Autograph, can carry out the
iterations for you, which, if they are available to you, can make it easier to use than a decimal search.
To start the process, we have to select two points on the graph visual basis. A decimal search, in
contrast, just requires calculations, which can easily be done using a computer. Out of the three,
some are faster at converging to the root that others and some are easier to use than others, especially
with the recent technology made available to everyone. I repeat this until I get down to increments
the size of 0.00001. But whichever bit of software you use, it is hands down the easier way of
finding the roots of an equation. This process is then repeated on the new x values until they
converge on the root to the required level of accuracy. Care must be taken when choosing a starting
value and asymptotes can cause the method to fail. Some computer programs, such as Autograph,
can carry out the iterations for you, which, if they are available to you, can make it easier to use than
a decimal search. It must still be rearranged manually though, and a large proportion of
rearrangements fail. Depending on your calcularor, you should get there after about 5 iterations. The
error bounds show that this works as there is a change of sign.
Using Autograph is much, much simpler as you have the ability to zoom in on the point where the
signs change, i.e. the point on the X-axis, and can do so to many places. To do this, we need to find
the gradient at that point. Taking x 0 as the first guess at the root, the tangent to the curve at (x 0,f(x
0 )) crosses the x axis at x 1, the second guess. As for the speed of convergence, it would be slower
that Newton Raphson because of the extra time needed to re-arrange the equation but it is faster than
Decimal search. The Decimal search method enables you to get a very close approximate to the real
solution but more easily. However the need for much manual computation can make the process quite
laborious and time consuming. I repeat this until I get down to increments the size of 0.00001. Out
of the three, some are faster at converging to the root that others and some are easier to use than
others, especially with the recent technology made available to everyone. Most of the mistakes are
made in this stage by humans. It is shown that the root lies between -1.53407035 and -1.53407025.
Below is the Excel spread sheet with f(x n ) and its derivative, f’(x) shown. This makes it even easier
than excel but it is less accurate as it only gives the root to 3 decimal places where as excel can be
configured to as many decimal places as needed. Looking at the graph you can see that the root is
between -2 and -1. This makes it very easy to work out the repetitive part of the method and makes
the speed of convergence much faster. Below is the Excel spread sheet with f(x n ) and its derivative,
f’(x) shown. OR did they add the word negative in there so the re-arrangement of the equation
would be correct so you don't take the square root of a negative number? (edited 9 years ago) 0
Report Reply Reply 3 9 years ago Smaug123 15 Original post by Inevitable I read that it is usually
best to re-arrange by having the dominant term on it's own first and go from there. This is the only
hard part of the method as the iterative part of the method is very simple with the use of the formula.
The mark scheme re-arranged to get a different iteration formula and got an approximation as 1.653
to 3 decimal places. But with ever growing technology, there might already be software that solves
the roots of an equation after entering the formula in. For example sing the same rearrangement of
the equation to find the root between 5 and 6 using 5 as the starting point, the iterations converge on
the root between 1 and 2. Similarly to before, I used excel to work out the value of f(x). A change of
sign will always indicate a root if the function is continuous. I read that it is usually best to re-arrange
by having the dominant term on it's own first and go from there. The diagram above shows that the
gradient of g(x) is within this range at the root which is found. Despite this, it is a very effective
method as failure chances are relatively very low and the root can be found to many decimal places if
the right software is used. With the use of AutoGraph Software, It is even easier as you don’t even
have to work out the gradient function. A decimal search, in contrast, just requires calculations,
which can easily be done using a computer. The value of g'(x) at this point is far greater than 1, so the
iterations do not converge. This shows that generally the Newton-Raphson method has a much
quicker speed of convergence than the other two methods.
It must still be rearranged manually though, and a large proportion of rearrangements fail. If that
g’(x) 1, then we know that the function will not converge to the root but will diverge away. Looking
at the graph you can see that the root is between -2 and -1. This is when the equation would have
been solved by using the quadratic formula, completing the square or by factorising it. This shows
that generally the Newton-Raphson method has a much quicker speed of convergence than the other
two methods. Also, my other question is the following: a) show that the equation x 3. Below is the
Excel spread sheet with f(x n ) and its derivative, f’(x) shown. A decimal search, in contrast, just
requires calculations, which can easily be done using a computer. This makes it particularly useful if
computer software is not available. OR did they add the word negative in there so the re-arrangement
of the equation would be correct so you don't take the square root of a negative number? (edited 9
years ago) 0 Report Reply Reply 3 9 years ago Smaug123 15 Original post by Inevitable I read that it
is usually best to re-arrange by having the dominant term on it's own first and go from there. I read
that it is usually best to re-arrange by having the dominant term on it's own first and go from there. I
repeat this until I get down to increments the size of 0.00001. Care must be taken when choosing a
starting value and asymptotes can cause the method to fail. Solving equations by numerical methods
- The Interval Bisection method. The diagram above shows that the gradient of g(x) is within this
range at the root which is found. Then we look at where the tangent crosses the X axis and that value
will be the new x value on the graph for a tangent. The diagram above shows that the gradient of g(x)
is within this range at the root which is found. It must still be rearranged manually though, and a
large proportion of rearrangements fail. But with ever growing technology, there might already be
software that solves the roots of an equation after entering the formula in. Both make good use of
Autograph software visually interpret equations before using an Excel spreadsheet to carry out the
calculations to find each root. This is the only hard part of the method as the iterative part of the
method is very simple with the use of the formula. It's more precise than that, but it means that for the
right kinds of iteration, repeating the iteration will bring your starting point closer and closer to that
fixed point. This is because the tangent crosses the asymptote, as shown below. So using the Re-
arrangement method to solve f(x), I find that the root is - 1.961703555. This makes it even easier
than excel but it is less accurate as it only gives the root to 3 decimal places where as excel can be
configured to as many decimal places as needed. This process is then repeated on the new x values
until they converge on the root to the required level of accuracy. In this case, would you re-arrange
until you find a suitable iteration formula that works. With the use of AutoGraph Software, It is even
easier as you don’t even have to work out the gradient function. So the only human interaction
needed is to look at the results and manually looking at between which two points (limits) there is a
sign change and then setting the new limits as such. This is because the tangent crosses the
asymptote, as shown below.
As the function f(x) is continuous, a change of sign will always indicate a root. But with Computers
being able to do even that, it makes it even easier to use it. Register Number: 04666380 (England
and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: Imperial House, 2nd Floor, 40-42 Queens
Road, Brighton, East Sussex, BN1 3XB. For this method, I will be using a different function to the
other two. Because of this it is the most difficult method to use, especially if you do not have
software to automate the iterations. This makes it much easier than excel but it is again less accurate
as it only gives the root to 3 decimal places where as excel can be configured to as many decimal
places as needed. But regarding the speed of convergence, this is relatively low as it is not
completely automated and requires human interaction after each set of results and is very repetitive.
So when I substitute the incremented values of x between -10 and 0 into the equation, I get the
following results. I am going to use the inbuilt function in AutoGraph to work it out initially and then
I will use Excel to work the root out to more decimal places. So using the Re- arrangement method
to solve f(x), I find that the root is - 1.961703555. This makes it even easier than excel but it is less
accurate as it only gives the root to 3 decimal places where as excel can be configured to as many
decimal places as needed. Is this correct (and could you explain some of these higher-level concepts
or would they not make sense to me fully with the current knowledge I have? (A-level maths only) -
------ Also, my other question is the following: a) show that the equation x 3. But whichever bit of
software you use, it is hands down the easier way of finding the roots of an equation. Solving
equations by numerical methods - The Interval Bisection method. Writing the formula in a cell and
dragging it down so it is easier to calculate the y values for various points of x. Below is the Excel
spread sheet with f(x n ) and its derivative, f’(x) shown. Using Autograph is much, much simpler as
you have the ability to zoom in on the point where the signs change, i.e. the point on the X-axis, and
can do so to many places. Care must be taken when choosing a starting value and asymptotes can
cause the method to fail. Then we look at where the tangent crosses the X axis and that value will be
the new x value on the graph for a tangent. As for the speed of convergence, it would be slower that
Newton Raphson because of the extra time needed to re-arrange the equation but it is faster than
Decimal search. I don't quite understand why the question added the word negative in there when
the root is located between a negative interval. The iterations are also wrong as they diverge away
from the point as well. Annoying Red Cheeks urgent query, I would really appreciate your help.
Some methods give you the exact and precise answer but usually are harder and more complex. To
do this, we need to find the gradient at that point. A change of sign will always indicate a root if the
function is continuous. But with ever growing technology, there might already be software that
solves the roots of an equation after entering the formula in. For example sing the same
rearrangement of the equation to find the root between 5 and 6 using 5 as the starting point, the
iterations converge on the root between 1 and 2. It must still be rearranged manually though, and a
large proportion of rearrangements fail. With the use of excel, it is every easy to write down the
formula of the method in one cell and dragging it down as many cells as you wish to (the number of
iterations) and it is very easy to use.
But with Computers being able to do even that, it makes it even easier to use it. Annoying Red
Cheeks urgent query, I would really appreciate your help. Out of the three, some are faster at
converging to the root that others and some are easier to use than others, especially with the recent
technology made available to everyone. After 19 iterations, I found the root of the equation as from
then on, it repeats. But regarding the speed of convergence, this is relatively low as it is not
completely automated and requires human interaction after each set of results and is very repetitive.
Compared to the change of sign method both are generally more easy to use as once the initial
formula has been entered it is very quick and simple to do the iterations many times. However the
need for much manual computation can make the process quite laborious and time consuming. With
the use of excel, it is every easy to write down the formula of the method in one cell and dragging it
down as many cells as you wish to (the number of iterations) and it is very easy to use. Official
Oxford 2024 Postgraduate Applicants Thread Last Person to Post an Emoji Here Wins. With the use
of AutoGraph Software, It is even easier as you don’t even have to work out the gradient function. I
am going to use the inbuilt function in AutoGraph to work it out initially and then I will use Excel to
work the root out to more decimal places. I don't quite understand why the question added the word
negative in there when the root is located between a negative interval. Depending on your calcularor,
you should get there after about 5 iterations. The Decimal search method enables you to get a very
close approximate to the real solution but more easily. As for the speed of convergence, it would be
slower that Newton Raphson because of the extra time needed to re-arrange the equation but it is
faster than Decimal search. If we take a look at the Newton Raphson formula, it’s denominator is the
gradient function of f(x). The diagram above shows that the gradient of g(x) is within this range at
the root which is found. But with ever growing technology, there might already be software that
solves the roots of an equation after entering the formula in. I don't quite understand why the
question added the word negative in there when the root is located between a negative interval. The
downside of the method is that it is the most likely method of all three to fail as there is always a
chance that when you rearrange an equation and start the iterative process, it will not converge to the
root but it will diverge away. The value of g'(x) at this point is far greater than 1, so the iterations do
not converge. For example sing the same rearrangement of the equation to find the root between 5
and 6 using 5 as the starting point, the iterations converge on the root between 1 and 2. To start the
process, we have to select two points on the graph visual basis. But after the 4 th iteration, we have
reached a point where the x value started repeating due to the fact that this was to 4 decimal places.
Taking x 0 as the first guess at the root, the tangent to the curve at (x 0,f(x 0 )) crosses the x axis at x
1, the second guess. This makes it very easy to work out the repetitive part of the method and makes
the speed of convergence much faster. With the use of excel, it can be really easy to work out the
values of y when you sub in the x values. Some computer programs, such as Autograph, can carry out
the iterations for you, which, if they are available to you, can make it easier to use than a decimal
search. Is this correct (and could you explain some of these higher-level concepts or would they not
make sense to me fully with the current knowledge I have? (A-level maths only) ------- Also, my
other question is the following: a) show that the equation x 3.
In some cases you may not be able to differentiate f(x). To start the process, we have to select two
points on the graph visual basis. Writing the formula in a cell and dragging it down so it is easier to
calculate the y values for various points of x. This process is then repeated on the new x values until
they converge on the root to the required level of accuracy. The value of g'(x) at this point is far
greater than 1, so the iterations do not converge. With the use of excel, it can be really easy to work
out the values of y when you sub in the x values. This will mean that the gradient function will equal
to zero. It must still be rearranged manually though, and a large proportion of rearrangements fail. If
that g’(x) 1, then we know that the function will not converge to the root but will diverge away. In
some cases you may not be able to differentiate f(x). If we take a look at the Newton Raphson
formula, it’s denominator is the gradient function of f(x). I repeat this until I get down to increments
the size of 0.00001. The downside of the method is that it is the most likely method of all three to
fail as there is always a chance that when you rearrange an equation and start the iterative process, it
will not converge to the root but it will diverge away. So the only human interaction needed is to
look at the results and manually looking at between which two points (limits) there is a sign change
and then setting the new limits as such. Looking at the graph you can see that the root is between -2
and -1. In this case, would you re-arrange until you find a suitable iteration formula that works. This
makes it very easy to work out the repetitive part of the method and makes the speed of convergence
much faster. However the need for much manual computation can make the process quite laborious
and time consuming. Both make good use of Autograph software visually interpret equations before
using an Excel spreadsheet to carry out the calculations to find each root. OR did they add the word
negative in there so the re-arrangement of the equation would be correct so you don't take the square
root of a negative number. Also, my other question is the following: a) show that the equation x 3.
Solving equations by numerical methods - The Interval Bisection method. But with ever growing
technology, there might already be software that solves the roots of an equation after entering the
formula in. The fact that the solution lies between -3 and -4 can also be seen in the graph. The
diagram above shows that the gradient of g(x) is within this range at the root which is found. For
this method, I will be using a different function to the other two. A decimal search, in contrast, just
requires calculations, which can easily be done using a computer. Because of this it is the most
difficult method to use, especially if you do not have software to automate the iterations. The error
bounds show that this works as there is a change of sign.