maths.free › Numerical Methods › Floating point and error

Floating point and error

Why 0.1 + 0.2 ≠ 0.3 on a computer, and how error propagates.

Computers store numbers in binary with ~16 significant digits; 0.1 is not representable exactly. Round-off accumulates, and subtracting nearly equal numbers destroys digits (cancellation). Picture it: 255 in binary is 11111111, and 0.1 in binary never terminates. Think it: a stable algorithm keeps error growth linear; conditioning is a property of the problem, stability of the method.

Vinna dæmi · 0.1 + 0.2

Arithmetic · Arithmetic

Evaluate 0.1 + 0.2

0.1 + 0.2

Skref fyrir skref

  1. 0.3 = \frac{3}{10}

    Add: 0.1 + 0.2 = 3/10.

  2. \frac{3}{10} = 0.3

    Simplify.

Sýna svarið
0.3

Núna ūú Veldu vandamál, eða sláðu inn eða teikna eigin. Hvert skref, mynd, svarið falið þar til þú spyrð.

Haltu eigin vinnu þinni

Ókeypis reikningur bætir við athugasemdum við hverja kennslustund, skrá yfir það sem þú hefur lokið, leyst vandamál á einum stað og kennari sem þú getur spurt um þessa síðu.Stærðfræðin sjálf er opin öllum, skráður inn eða ekki.

Skráðu þig inn Innskráning

Tákn notuð hér

Pikkaðu á hvaða tákn sem er fyrir fulla skilgreiningu, mynd og hvað hvert bréf í því merkir.

Hvernig á að nota: Floating point and error

  1. Add: 0.1 + 0.2 = 3/10.
  2. Simplify.

Spurningar sem fólk spyr

Why not just solve exactly?

Most equations have no closed-form solution at all, and many that do are unusable in practice. A numerical method delivers as many correct digits as you need, and a good one tells you how many that is.

Why can Newton's method fail?

If it starts where the tangent is nearly flat it shoots far away; near a repeated root it slows to a crawl; and with several roots it may land on the wrong one. A bracketing method like bisection is slower but cannot fail.

Meira í Numerical Methods

Root finding: bisection and Newton's methodNumerical integration: trapezoid and SimpsonInterpolation and Taylor approximation