research-article

An Enhancement of the Bisection Method Average Performance Preserving Minmax Optimality

Authors Info & Claims
Online:08 December 2020Publication History

Abstract

We identify a class of root-searching methods that surprisingly outperform the bisection method on the average performance while retaining minmax optimality. The improvement on the average applies for any continuous distributional hypothesis. We also pinpoint one specific method within the class and show that under mild initial conditions it can attain an order of convergence of up to 1.618, i.e., the same as the secant method. Hence, we attain both an improved average performance and an improved order of convergence with no cost on the minmax optimality of the bisection method. Numerical experiments show that, on regular functions, the proposed method requires a number of function evaluations similar to current state-of-the-art methods, about 24% to 37% of the evaluations required by the bisection procedure. In problems with non-regular functions, the proposed method performs significantly better than the state-of-the-art, requiring on average 82% of the total evaluations required for the bisection method, while the other methods were outperformed by bisection. In the worst case, while current state-of-the-art commercial solvers required two to three times the number of function evaluations of bisection, our proposed method remained within the minmax bounds of the bisection method.

References

  1. I. K. Argyros and S. K. Khattri. 2013. On the secant method. J. Complex. 29, 6 (2013), 36--44.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. R. P. Brent. 1971. An algorithm with guaranteed convergence for finding a zero of a function. Comput. J. 14, 4 (1971), 422--425.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. J. C. P. Bus and T. J. Dekker. 1975. Two efficient algorithms with guaranteed convergence for finding a zero of a function. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 1, 4 (1975), 330--345.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. S. C. Chapra and R. P. Canale. 2010. Numerical Methods for Engineers (6th ed.). McGraw-Hill Higher Education, New York, NY, 202--220.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. M. Dowell and P. Jarratt. 1971. A modified regula falsi method for computing the root of an equation. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 11, 2 (June 1971), 168--174.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. A. Eiger, K. Sikorski, and F. Stenger. 1984. A bisection method for systems of nonlinear equations. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 10, 4 (1984), 367--377.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. J. A. Ford. 1995. Improved Algorithms of Illinois—Type for the Numerical Solution of Nonlinear Equations. Department of Computer Science Report. University of Essex.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. S. Gal and W. Miranker. 1977. Optimal sequential and parallel search for finding a root. J. Combin. Theor. 23, 1 (1977), 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. S. Graf, E. Novak, and A. Papageorgiou. 1989. Bisection is not optimal on the average. Numer. Math. 55 (1989), 481--491.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. R. B. Kearfott. 1987. Some tests of generalized bisection. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 13, 3 (1987), 197--220.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. Kiefer. 1953. Sequential minimax search for a maximum. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 4, 3 (1953), 502--506.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Eduardo S. Laber, Ruy L. Milidiú, and Artur A. Pessoa. 2012. On binary searching with nonuniform costs. SIAM J. Comput. 31, 4 (2012), 855--864.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. D. Le. 1982. Three new rapidly convergent algorithms for finding a zero of a function. SIAM J. Sci. Statist. Comput. 6, 1 (1982), 193--208.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. D. Le. 1985. An efficient derivative-free method for solving nonlinear equations. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 11, 3 (1985), 250--262.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. J. M. McNamee and V. Y. Pan. 2012. Efficient polynomial root-refiners: A survey and new record efficiency estimates. Comput. Math. Applic. 63, 1 (2012), 239--254.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. D. E. Muller. 1956. A method for solving algebraic equations using an automatic computer. Math. Tables Aids Comput. 10, 56 (1956), 208--215.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. D. Nerinckx and A. Haegemans. 1976. A comparison of non-linear equation solvers. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2, 2 (1976), 145--148.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. V. Norton. 1985. Algorithm 631 finding a bracketed zero by Larkin’s method of rational interpolation. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 11, 2 (1985), 120--134.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. E. Novak. 1989. Average-case results for zero finding. J. Complex. 5, 4 (1989), 489--501.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. E. Novak and K. Ritter. 1993. Some complexity results for zero finding for univariate functions. J. Complex. 9, 1 (1993), 15--40.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. E. Novak, K. Ritter, and H. Woźniakowski. 1995. Average-case optimality of a hybrid secant-bisection method. Math. Comp. 64, 212 (1995), 1517--1539.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Y. Perl, A. Itai, and H. Avni. 1978. Interpolation search—A log log n search. Commun. ACM 21, 7 (1978), 550--553.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. W. H. Press, S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling, and B. P. Flannery. 2007. Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing (6th ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 442--486.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. J. R. Rice. 1969. A Set of 74 Test Functions for Nonlinear Equation Solvers. Department of Computer Science Report 64-034. Purdue University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. C. Ridders. 1979. A new algorithm for computing a single root of a real continuous function. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. 26, 11 (1979), 979--980.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. K. Ritter. 1994. Average errors for zero finding: Lower bounds for smooth or monotone functions. Aequat. Mathem. 48, 2 (1994), 194--219.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. J. Segura. 2010. Reliable computation of the zeros of solutions of second order linear ODEs using a fourth order method. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 48, 2 (2010), 452--469.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. R. I. Shrager. 1985. A rapid robust rootfinder. Math. Comp. 44, 169 (1985), 151--165.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. K. Sikorski. 1982. Bisection is optimal. Numer. Math. 40, 1 (1982), 111--117.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. K. Sikorski. 1985. Optimal solution of nonlinear equations. J. Complex. 1 (1985), 197--209.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. S. A. Stage. 2013. Comments on an improvement to the Brent’s method. Int. J. Experim. Algor. 4, 1 (2013), 1--16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. J. F. Traub. 1963. Iterative methods for the solution of equations. Bell Tel. Lab. 8, 4 (1963), 550--551.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. M. N. Vrahatis. 1988. Algorithm 666 CHABIS: A mathematical software package for locating and evaluating roots of systems of nonlinear equations. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 14, 4 (1988), 330--336.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. X. Wu. 2005. Improved Muller method and bisection method with global and asymptotic superlinear convergence of both point and interval for solving nonlinear equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 166, 2 (2005), 299--311.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. A. C. Yao and F. F. Yao. 1976. The complexity of searching an ordered random table. In Proceedings of the 17th Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, Houston, TX, 173--177.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Z. Zhang. 2011. An improvement to the Brent’s method. Int. J. Experim. Algor. 2, 1 (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. An Enhancement of the Bisection Method Average Performance Preserving Minmax Optimality

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format
      About Cookies On This Site

      We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

      Learn more

      Got it!