tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Am I allowed to do non-rigorous numerical analysis?) Sun, 04 Nov 2018 23:26:27 -0800 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/ Lussumo Vanilla 1.1.9 & Feed Publisher Nilima comments on "Am I allowed to do non-rigorous numerical analysis?" (16627) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1178/am-i-allowed-to-do-nonrigorous-numerical-analysis/?Focus=16627#Comment_16627 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1178/am-i-allowed-to-do-nonrigorous-numerical-analysis/?Focus=16627#Comment_16627 Wed, 19 Oct 2011 14:41:47 -0700 Nilima
Without knowing more about the setting it's hard to provide more concrete advice. However, consider the following scenario: a is a global minimizer of a function with many local minima. There may be a numerical strategy which is based on computing the residual, and the computed a may indeed reduce the residual to 10^-5. That doesn't imply a is close to the computed a.

I'm sorry to be nit-picky. ]]>
quid comments on "Am I allowed to do non-rigorous numerical analysis?" (16621) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1178/am-i-allowed-to-do-nonrigorous-numerical-analysis/?Focus=16621#Comment_16621 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1178/am-i-allowed-to-do-nonrigorous-numerical-analysis/?Focus=16621#Comment_16621 Wed, 19 Oct 2011 06:51:35 -0700 quid This seems like a reasonable question to me; some more details might or might not be required but even in the current form it seems alright to me.

]]>
David Speyer comments on "Am I allowed to do non-rigorous numerical analysis?" (16620) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1178/am-i-allowed-to-do-nonrigorous-numerical-analysis/?Focus=16620#Comment_16620 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1178/am-i-allowed-to-do-nonrigorous-numerical-analysis/?Focus=16620#Comment_16620 Wed, 19 Oct 2011 06:31:34 -0700 David Speyer
Basically, the question is the following. There is a real number a which plays an important role in the OP's paper. There is no closed formula for a, but he can approximate it numerically. If he publishes 5 digits of a, is that an implicit claim that he has rigorously proven a to lie in an interval of width 10^{-5}, or is it enough to have used numerical algorithms which are generally reliable? ]]>