Re: Successive Over-Relaxation ... what is wrong? Improvements?

[Joza]

Yea, for A = 10x10, for example, here is the result, with relaxation
parameter = 1.4:

...
 x: 4.999998     iters: 710      norm: 0.0000010676089660 
 x: 4.999998     iters: 711      norm: 0.0000003683371855 
 x: 4.999998     iters: 712      norm: 0.0000006345346101 
 x: 4.999998     iters: 713      norm: 0.0000007962736616 
 x: 4.999998     iters: 714      norm: 0.0000008603756717 
 x: 4.999998     iters: 715      norm: 0.0000008603756717 
 x: 4.999998     iters: 716      norm: 0.0000008603756717 
 x: 4.999998     iters: 717      norm: 0.0000008603756717 
 x: 4.999998     iters: 718      norm: 0.0000008603756717 
 x: 4.999998     iters: 719      norm: 0.0000008603756717 
 x: 4.999998     iters: 720      norm: 0.0000008603756717 

ans =

    5.0000
    9.0000
   12.0000
   14.0000
   15.0000
   15.0000
   14.0000
   12.0000
    9.0000
    5.0000

So it seems to work here?





--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Successive-Over-Relaxation-what-is-wrong-Improvements-tp4646041p4646067.html
Sent from the Octave - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.