Secant method
In numerical analysis, the secant method is a root-finding algorithm that uses a succession of roots of secant lines to better approximate a root of a function f. The secant method can be thought of as a finite-difference approximation of Newton's method, so it is considered a quasi-Newton method.
Historically, it is as an evolution of the method of false position, which predates Newton's method by over 3000 years.
[1] The secant method is an iterative numerical method for finding a zero of a function f. Given two initial values x0 and x1, the method proceeds according to the recurrence relation This is a nonlinear second-order recurrence that is well-defined given f and the two initial values x0 and x1.
Ideally, the initial values should be chosen close to the desired zero.
Starting with initial values x0 and x1, we construct a line through the points (x0, f(x0)) and (x1, f(x1)), as shown in the picture above.
In slope–intercept form, the equation of this line is The root of this linear function, that is the value of x such that y = 0 is We then use this new value of x as x2 and repeat the process, using x1 and x2 instead of x0 and x1.
We continue this process, solving for x3, x4, etc., until we reach a sufficiently high level of precision (a sufficiently small difference between xn and xn−1): The iterates
of the secant method converge to a root of
is twice continuously differentiable and the root in question is a simple root, i.e., it has multiplicity 1, the order of convergence is the golden ratio
[2] This convergence is superlinear but subquadratic.
If the initial values are not close enough to the root or
is not well-behaved, then there is no guarantee that the secant method converges at all.
There is no general definition of "close enough", but the criterion for convergence has to do with how "wiggly" the function is on the interval between the initial values.
The secant method does not require or guarantee that the root remains bracketed by sequential iterates, like the bisection method does, and hence it does not always converge.
The false position method (or regula falsi) uses the same formula as the secant method.
This means that the false position method always converges; however, only with a linear order of convergence.
Bracketing with a super-linear order of convergence as the secant method can be attained with improvements to the false position method (see Regula falsi § Improvements in regula falsi) such as the ITP method or the Illinois method.
The recurrence formula of the secant method can be derived from the formula for Newton's method by using the finite-difference approximation, for a small
If we compare Newton's method with the secant method, we see that Newton's method converges faster (order 2 against order the golden ratio φ ≈ 1.6).
[2] However, Newton's method requires the evaluation of both
at every step, while the secant method only requires the evaluation of
Therefore, the secant method may sometimes be faster in practice.
For instance, if we assume that evaluating
takes as much time as evaluating its derivative and we neglect all other costs, we can do two steps of the secant method (decreasing the logarithm of the error by a factor φ2 ≈ 2.6) for the same cost as one step of Newton's method (decreasing the logarithm of the error by a factor of 2), so the secant method is faster.
In higher dimensions, the full set of partial derivatives required for Newton's method, that is, the Jacobian matrix, may become much more expensive to calculate than the function itself.
If, however, we consider parallel processing for the evaluation of the derivative or derivatives, Newton's method can be faster in clock time though still costing more computational operations overall.
The following graph shows the function f in red and the last secant line in bold blue.
In the graph, the x intercept of the secant line seems to be a good approximation of the root of f. Below, the secant method is implemented in the Python programming language.
It is then applied to find a root of the function f(x) = x2 − 612 with initial points
It is very important to have a good stopping criterion above, otherwise, due to limited numerical precision of floating point numbers, the algorithm can return inaccurate results if running for too many iterations.
