So what would the Cody size of a brute-force algorithm be for this problem?
I got the correct answers within 50*eps for all answers except x=0.001 for c. Is c_correct value correct for x=0.001? I put in a small correction factor 1.5e-14 to get your c_correct value.
It is possible to obtain the results for this series using Wolfram Alpha or Symbolic Math Toolbox. It is not a pretty result, but the series converges. Unless you are up to hard work, there is no point in finding this simplification manually. And the Taylor Series does not help.
Interesting, getting rough estimate is easy, but without further derivations, being close is hard.
Could this oscillatory behavior be dampened by filtering it for example?
this one is truely a wonderfun code! make my eyes open.
Mr Castanon is a true god. I preferred asking wolfram solver.
Wish I studied infinite series properly at school
Yes, you are right S L, a direct brute force summation is surely not the most efficient method of determining the sums of these series. You are the only one so far with a valid solution that met the 50*eps tests. In fact your answers are very much closer than that to mine, within a few eps. However, there is another single analytic function that can be used which is much simpler and would undoubtedly give you a lower "size" than 92 if you or others can find it. R. Stafford
thanks for the hint
753 Solvers
338 Solvers
Find nearest prime number less than input number
274 Solvers
498 Solvers
525 Solvers
Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!
Start Hunting!