CORRECTION, prompted by Valeri: the step IS a fraction of the bracket — with the ratio similarity 1-S = min(1,|f|/(|f'|D)) so step = min(D,|f|/|f'|) — and my 'absolute length cannot march' was wrong, as was the follow-up guess that we creep along one side: measured, 91.5% of our probes DO shrink the bracket, more often than Chandrupatla's 87.5%. What differs is how much each probe removes: 0.93 halvings per evaluation against 2.26. A linear model of the value axis undershoots on a wide bracket of a convex function, so the new bracket is about half; inverse quadratic interpolation lands near the root and removes four fifths. The limit is the ORDER OF THE MODEL the similarity is read against, and all three parameter-free ways round it are now measured failures (cbrt, log change of variable, derived3_m). Paper corrected

Browse Source

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

...

This commit is contained in:

vvs

2026-09-21 00:12:58 +01:00

co-authored by Claude Opus 5

parent 0fb75be3cf

commit 08ffa42e98

4 changed files with 143 additions and 9 deletions

Show all changes Ignore whitespace when comparing lines Ignore changes in amount of whitespace Ignore changes in whitespace at EOL

Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

article/sim_numerics.pdf

BIN

Binary file not shown.