Skip to main content

numerical integration - Error in integral representation of Appell's series


It was originally asked here.


According to About the confluent versions of Appell Hypergeometric Function and Lauricella Functions the integral


$$\int_0^1t^{a-1}(1-t)^{c-a-1}(1-xt)^{-b}e^{yt}~dt $$


can be expressed as


$$\int_0^1t^{a-1}(1-t)^{c-a-1}(1-xt)^{-b}e^{yt}~dt=\dfrac{\Gamma(a)\Gamma(c-a)}{\Gamma(c)}\lim\limits_{k\to\infty}F_1\left(a,b,k,c;x,\dfrac{y}{k}\right).$$


It look like true, but gives numeric error. Look that, calculated by Mathematica:


F[a_?NumericQ, b_?NumericQ, c_?NumericQ, x_?NumericQ, y_?NumericQ] := 
NIntegrate[t^(a - 1) (1 - t)^(c - a - 1) (1 - x t)^(-b) Exp[ y t], {t, 0, 1}]


N[F[3/2, 1, 2, .4, .3], 20]
{2.8964403550198865`}

G[a_?NumericQ, b_?NumericQ, c_?NumericQ, x_?NumericQ, y_?NumericQ] :=
Gamma[a] Gamma[c - a]/Gamma[c] Limit[AppellF1[a, b, k, c, x, y/k],k -> Infinity]

N[G[3/2, 1, 2, .4, .3], 20]
{2.2854650559595466`}


where I was careful to ensure that $|x|<1,|y|<1$, and $\text{Re}(c)>\text{Re}(a)>0$, which are the condition of $F_1$.Note that the results are different. Furthermore, according to Wolfram Alpha


$$\lim\limits_{k\rightarrow \infty}F_1[3/2,1,k;2;0.4,\text{any/k}]=1.4549$$


So, is It a math issue or Mathematica issue?



Answer



There is a bug in the calculation of the large $k$ limit of AppellF1. This is easy to illustrate:


Needs["NumericalCalculus`"]
wrongLimit = Limit[AppellF1[3/2, 1, k, 2, 4/10, (3/10)/k], k -> Infinity];
correctLimit = NLimit[AppellF1[3/2, 1, k, 2, 4/10, (3/10)/k], k -> Infinity];
Plot[{AppellF1[3/2, 1, k, 2, 4/10, (3/10)/k], wrongLimit, correctLimit}, {k, .5, 5}
, PlotStyle -> {Blue, Directive[Red, Dashed], Directive[Green, Dashed]}, PlotRange -> {Automatic, {0, 3}}]


enter image description here


Perhaps the bug should be reported. In the meantime, you can use NLimit to get the correct limit. If you use NLimit in your definition of G, you get results that consistent with those of F (up to numerical inaccuracy).


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - How to draw lines between specified dots on ListPlot?

I would like to create a plot where I have unconnected dots and some connected. So far, I have figured out how to draw the dots. My code is the following: ListPlot[{{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4,13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full] I have thought using ListLinePlot command, but I don't know how to specify to the command to draw only selected lines between the dots. Do have any suggestions/hints on how to do that? Thank you. Answer One possibility would be to use Epilog with Line : ListPlot[ {{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4, 13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full, Epilog -> { Line[ ...

dynamic - How can I make a clickable ArrayPlot that returns input?

I would like to create a dynamic ArrayPlot so that the rectangles, when clicked, provide the input. Can I use ArrayPlot for this? Or is there something else I should have to use? Answer ArrayPlot is much more than just a simple array like Grid : it represents a ranged 2D dataset, and its visualization can be finetuned by options like DataReversed and DataRange . These features make it quite complicated to reproduce the same layout and order with Grid . Here I offer AnnotatedArrayPlot which comes in handy when your dataset is more than just a flat 2D array. The dynamic interface allows highlighting individual cells and possibly interacting with them. AnnotatedArrayPlot works the same way as ArrayPlot and accepts the same options plus Enabled , HighlightCoordinates , HighlightStyle and HighlightElementFunction . data = {{Missing["HasSomeMoreData"], GrayLevel[ 1], {RGBColor[0, 1, 1], RGBColor[0, 0, 1], GrayLevel[1]}, RGBColor[0, 1, 0]}, {GrayLevel[0], GrayLevel...

functions - What best practices or performance considerations are there for choosing between Cases, Position, Pick and Select?

Cases , Select , Pick and Position each have different syntaxes and purposes, but there are times when you can express the same calculation equivalently using either of them. So with this input: test = RandomInteger[{-25, 25}, {20, 2}] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {-8, -19}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {-3, -25}, {21, -18}, {4, 4}, {2, -2}, {-24, 8}, {-17, -8}, {4, -18}, {22, -24}, {-4, -3}, {21, 0}, {19, 18}, {-23, -8}, {23, -25}, {14, -2}, {-1, -13}} You can get the following equivalent results: Cases[test, {_, _?Positive}] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} Select[test, #[[2]] > 0 &] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} Pick[test, Sign[test[[All, 2]] ], 1] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} test[[Flatten@Position[test[[All, 2]], _?Positive] ]] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} Are there performance or other considerations that should guide which you shou...