Skip to main content

evaluation - Elegant high precision `log1p`?


Sometimes it is hard to understand how numerical expressions are evaluated. I remember reading claims by Wolfram on how smart the Kernel is to evaluate expressions trees numerically by recognizing patterns, yet I don't see how it applies in very simple examples.


This question is about numerics, but to see if symbolics can help in an elegant way.


It is known that when working with finite precision, the function $\log(1+x)$ should have a special implementation for small $x$. That is why functions like log1p exists in many libraries (on top of log). For example:


/*C code*/ log(1. + 1.e-15) == 1.11022e-15


/*C code*/ log1p(1.e-15) == 1.e-15


(The second version is more exact, the first is "wrong")



In Mathematica:


Log[1. + 1.*^-15] == 1.11022*10^-15


(wrong answer)


Mathematica doesn't have such Log1P function. One can say, well, that is because it doesn't need to, because of the symbolic power. In fact one can know the answer.


N[Log[1 + 1/10^15], 100] = 9.999999999999995000000000000003333333333333330833333333333335333333333333331666666666666668095238095*10^-16


But this is not general, if I want to evaluate Log[1 + x] and x has machine precision then I can't force to use something like log1p. Because 1+x will evaluate to a machine precision number.


These are my attempts:


x = 1.*^-15;
Log[1 + x]
Log[1. + x]

N[Log[1. + N[x, 20]], 20]
N[Log[1 + N[x, 20]], 20]

All evaluate to the wrong answer (1.11022*10^-15)


Finally I find this expression,


N[Log[1 + Rationalize[x, 0]], 20]
9.999999999999995000*10^-16

But really? Is it that hard to get $\log(1+x)$ for small $x$ numerically? Do I have to roll my own Log1p?



Answer




Update:


yode points out in a comment below that there are log1p() and expm1() functions in Mathematica! However they are hidden. They are simply:


Internal`Log1p
Internal`Expm1

They operate only on numeric inputs.


(I don't know at what version these showed up.)


Compare this plot to the one further below using the Log function. The errors really are all zero!


Plot[Internal`Log1p[x]/x - 
N[N[Log[1 + SetPrecision[x, Infinity]], 34]]/x, {x, 0.01, 1},

PlotPoints -> 100, PlotRange -> All, ImageSize -> Large]

errors all zero!




I don't think Mathematica has that function. Seems like it should. (Same for expm1().) You should not need to resort to non-machine arithmetic to get the right answer.


Here is something that will do the trick using only machine arithmetic, if the input is a machine number:


log1p[x_] :=
If[MachineNumberQ[x],
If[x < 0.5,
If[# - 1 == 0, x,

x Divide[Log[#], # - 1]] &[1 + x],
Log[1 + x]],
Log[1 + x]]

If it's not a machine number, then it just gives you Log[1+x].


You can compile the machine number portion for much faster execution (by two orders of magnitude!):


log1px = Compile[{{x, _Real}},
If[x < 0.5,
If[# - 1 == 0, x,
x Divide[Log[#], # - 1]] &[1 + x],

Log[1 + x]], CompilationTarget -> "C"]

The cutoff for x >= 0.5 is where Log[1+x] works just fine, with only the least significant bit varying:


Plot[Log[1 + x]/x - 
N[N[Log[1 + SetPrecision[x, Infinity]], 34]]/x, {x, 0.01, 1},
PlotPoints -> 100, PlotRange -> All, ImageSize -> Large]

things go south below 0.5


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[ ...

equation solving - Invert and fit implicitly defined curve

I need to fit an implicitly defined curve. I thought I could get some data out of Solve , and then using FindFit . Therefore, I would like to find the relation the parametric curve defined by $F(x,y)=0$: Solve[-(1/2) + 1/2 (0.41202 BesselK[0, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]] + (0.101483 x BesselK[1, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]])/Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]) == 0, y] But I can't get an output: Solve was unable to solve the system with inexact coefficients or the system obtained by direct rationalization of inexact numbers present in the system. Since many of the methods used by Solve require exact input, providing Solve with an exact version of the system may help. >> Edit: In particular, I would like to fit the data coming from the curve with the expression of another curve, and not with a function $f(x)$. In particular, since this clearly looks like a cardioid , I would like it to fit to something like it. What other strategies could I try?

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...