Re: Maintenance of precision in NIntegrate

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg60516] Re: [mg60504] Maintenance of precision in NIntegrate*From*: Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu>*Date*: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 04:45:36 -0400 (EDT)*Organization*: Mathematics & Statistics, Univ. of Mass./Amherst*References*: <200509180516.BAA02315@smc.vnet.net>*Reply-to*: murray at math.umass.edu*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

You may want to set option WorkingPrecision as well. Alan wrote: > Consider integrating a function arg[] with a stated PrecisionGoal, say 10: > > NIntegrate[arg[x], PrecisionGoal->10, ...] > > The integrand arg[x] is a numerical function of the form: > > arg[x] := (bunch of elementary functions) + NIntegrate[arg2[y],...] > > arg2[y] is, at best, computable to MachinePrecision. > > However, I don't know the best choices for > PrecisionGoal or related options for the second integral (the inside > integral) > in order to minimize my computation runtime. So, let's assume I do not use > these options at all in the inside integral. > > My question: will Mathematica then automatically request the inside > integral to perform at a high enough PrecisionGoal in order to > meet my PrecisionGoal target of 10 in the first (outside) integral? > > Thanks, > alan > > > > > -- Murray Eisenberg murray at math.umass.edu Mathematics & Statistics Dept. Lederle Graduate Research Tower phone 413 549-1020 (H) University of Massachusetts 413 545-2859 (W) 710 North Pleasant Street fax 413 545-1801 Amherst, MA 01003-9305

**References**:**Maintenance of precision in NIntegrate***From:*"Alan" <info@optioncity.REMOVETHIS.net>