How do you determine if adding more terms to the Taylor polynomial will improve its approximation of $f(p)$ or in other words, how do you determine if a Taylor series converges for a particular value of $x$? I understand the concept but not conceptually "enough." A clear explanation to help clear the road would be appreciated.
2026-03-28 20:03:28.1774728208
Taylor polynomial approximation
948 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in CALCULUS
- Equality of Mixed Partial Derivatives - Simple proof is Confusing
- How can I prove that $\int_0^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\frac{\ln(1+\cos(\alpha)\cos(x))}{\cos(x)}dx=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\pi^2}{4}-\alpha^2\right)$?
- Proving the differentiability of the following function of two variables
- If $f ◦f$ is differentiable, then $f ◦f ◦f$ is differentiable
- Calculating the radius of convergence for $\sum _{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{\left(\sqrt{ n^2+n}-\sqrt{n^2+1}\right)^n}{n^2}z^n$
- Number of roots of the e
- What are the functions satisfying $f\left(2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\frac{a_i}{3^i}\right)=\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\frac{a_i}{2^i}$
- Why the derivative of $T(\gamma(s))$ is $T$ if this composition is not a linear transformation?
- How to prove $\frac 10 \notin \mathbb R $
- Proving that: $||x|^{s/2}-|y|^{s/2}|\le 2|x-y|^{s/2}$
Related Questions in ALGEBRA-PRECALCULUS
- How to show that $k < m_1+2$?
- What are the functions satisfying $f\left(2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\frac{a_i}{3^i}\right)=\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\frac{a_i}{2^i}$
- Finding the value of cot 142.5°
- Why is the following $\frac{3^n}{3^{n+1}}$ equal to $\frac{1}{3}$?
- Extracting the S from formula
- Using trigonometric identities to simply the following expression $\tan\frac{\pi}{5} + 2\tan\frac{2\pi}{5}+ 4\cot\frac{4\pi}{5}=\cot\frac{\pi}{5}$
- Solving an equation involving binomial coefficients
- Is division inherently the last operation when using fraction notation or is the order of operation always PEMDAS?
- How is $\frac{\left(2\left(n+1\right)\right)!}{\left(n+1\right)!}\cdot \frac{n!}{\left(2n\right)!}$ simplified like that?
- How to solve algebraic equation
Related Questions in TAYLOR-EXPANSION
- Mc Laurin and his derivative.
- Maclaurin polynomial estimating $\sin 15°$
- why can we expand an expandable function for infinite?
- Solving a limit of $\frac{\ln(x)}{x-1}$ with taylor expansion
- How to I find the Taylor series of $\ln {\frac{|1-x|}{1+x^2}}$?
- Proving the binomial series for all real (complex) n using Taylor series
- Taylor series of multivariable functions problem
- Taylor series of $\frac{\cosh(t)-1}{\sinh(t)}$
- The dimension of formal series modulo $\sin(x)$
- Finding Sum of First Terms
Related Questions in APPROXIMATION-THEORY
- Almost locality of cubic spline interpolation
- Clarification for definition of admissible: $\Delta\in (K)$
- Best approximation of a function out of a closed subset
- Approximation for the following integral needed
- approximate bijective function such that the inverses are bijective and "easily" computable
- Approximating $\frac{\frac{N}{2}!\frac{N}{2}!}{(\frac{N}{2}-m)!(\frac{N}{2}+m)!}$ without using logs
- Prove that a set is not strictly convex
- Uniform approximation of second derivative via Bernstein polynomial
- Show that there exists 2 different best approximations
- Zolotarev number and commuting matrices
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
This is the subject of the remainder term. Statements of Taylor's theorem generally come with one or more formulas for the remainder in some fashion generalizing the mean value theorem that is often very amenable to bounding.
For example, using the Lagrange form of the remainder for the Taylor series to $e^x$, we have
$$ e^x = \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) + e^c \frac{x^{k+1}}{(k+1)!} $$
for some $c$ between $0$ and $x$. That is, if $x \geq 0$ then $0 \leq c \leq x$ and if $x \leq 0$ then $x \leq c \leq 0$.
So if you can divine any upper bound at all on the value of $e^c$, you can use this form to get bounds on the error of the $k$-th order approximation to $e^x$ is. For example, if $x < 0$, we automatically know $0 < e^c \leq 1$. Or if $0 < x < 1$, we know $1 \leq e^c < 4$.
e.g. if I was in the $0 < x < 1$ case and I wanted to know what $k$ I needed to get the error on $e^x$ to within $0.01$, I would first do the above analyis to get
$$ \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) + 1 \cdot \frac{x^{k+1}}{(k+1)!} \leq e^x \leq \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) + 4 \cdot \frac{x^{k+1}}{(k+1)!} $$
To make things easier, I'll throw in the bounds on $x$ as well:
$$ \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^k}{k!} \right) < e^x < \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^k}{k!} \right) + \frac{4}{(k+1)!} $$
where on the left side I've used $0 < x$ and on the right side I've used $x < 1$.
From this, I can see that the error is less than $4 / (k+1)!$. If I can make this value less than $0.01$, that ensures the error is even smaller, and I'm happy.
Sometimes this leaves you with a problem you'll have to spend some effort to solve. However, this problem is too easy to bother with complicated methods: I'll just use brute force:
so I'll use $k=5$, and I'm guaranteed that
$$ \left( \sum_{i=0}^5 \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) < e^x < \left( \sum_{i=0}^5 \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) + 0.01 $$
Note that I'm pretty sure that $k=4$ is actually good enough as well. But it would have taken more effort to prove this fact. Using $k=5$ doesn't mean we get wrong results -- it just means we spent a little more effort getting a good approximation than we really needed to. But quite possibly, the effort to find $k=4$ works would be a lot greater, so we're actually better off simply using the $k=5$ from the simple analysis.
In this case, one could even make a clever argument in the $x>0$ case for this particular function: clearly we have
$$ \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) \leq e^x $$
and we also have $e^c \leq e^x$. So we also know
$$ e^x \leq \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) + e^x \frac{x^{k+1}}{(k+1)!} $$ $$ e^x \left(1 - \frac{x^{k+1}}{(k+1)!} \right) \leq \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) $$
If you choose $k$ large enough so that $x^{k+1} < (k+1)!$, then we have
$$ e^x \leq \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) \left(1 - \frac{x^{k+1}}{(k+1)!} \right)^{-1} $$
$e^x$ grows really fast, so a bound like this that is multiplicative rather than additive may well be good enough for your purposes. A great deal of the time when using the remainder theorem you don't have to be so creative, though: there is often a straightforward way to come up with a bound on the error term. And it's usually okay if it's a really sloppy bound -- that just means you might wind up using a few more terms than you actually needed to, but that just means you'll be getting even better approximations than you were searching for.
Incidentally, if you don't actually care about bounds and just want to see convergence as $k \to \infty$, then the above can still apply; it's just that you can afford to be very sloppy in your bounds, so long as they still converge. e.g. for $x>0$, above I've proven that
$$ \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) \leq e^x \leq \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) \left(1 - \frac{x^{k+1}}{(k+1)!} \right)^{-1} $$
but to see convergence as $k \to \infty$, it is good enough, and probably even easier, to just use
$$ \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) \leq e^x \leq \left( \sum_{i=0}^k \frac{x^i}{i!} \right) + e^x \frac{x^{k+1}}{(k+1)!} $$
The ratio test proves that the infinite sum converges as $k \to \infty$. Squeeze theorem applied to either of the above inequalities shows that the infinite sum must converge to the value of $e^x$. And therefore, we can truly say that
$$ e^x = \sum_{i=0}^\infty \frac{x^i}{i!} $$
Functions $f(x)$ that have the property that their Taylor series actually converges to $f(x)$ are called analytic functions.
It may be interesting to know that there are functions whose Taylor series converges, but to something different than the function! So asking about convergence is an important question when using the infinite sums rather than the finite approximations with remainder.
Once you realize how easily a function could fail to be analytic, it a bit of a surprise to realize how many of the functions we're used to using really do turn out to be analytic.