scipy dblquad providing the wrong result in simple double integral










0















I am trying to calculate a straightforward doble definite integral in Python: function Max(0, (4-12x) + (6-12y)) in the square [0,1] x [0,1].



We can do it with Mathematica and get the exact result:



Integrate[Max[0, 4-12*u1 + 6-12*u2], u1, 0, 1, u2, 0,1] = 125/108.


With a simple Monte Carlo simulation I can confirm this result. However, using scipy.integrate.dblquad I am getting a value of 0.0005772072907971, with error 0.0000000000031299



from scipy.integrate import dblquad

def integ(u1, u2):
return max(0, (4 - 12*u1) + (6 - 12*u2))
sol_int, err = dblquad(integ, 0, 1, lambda _:0, lambda _:1, epsabs=1E-12, epsrel=1E-12)
print("dblquad: %0.16f. Error: %0.16f" % (sol_int, err) )


Agreed that the function is not derivable, but it is continuous, I see no reason for this particular integral to be problematic.



I thought maybe dblquad has an 'options' argument where I can try different numerical methods, but I found nothing like that.



So, what am I doing wrong?










share|improve this question

















  • 1





    When I run this using scipy 1.1.0 and numpy 1.15.4, the output is dblquad: 1.1574073869306833. Error: 0.0000000000031299

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 15:16











  • @Warren thank you, very interesting, that would be correct. I see I am using numpy 1.14.3, scipy 1.1.0. Python 3.6.5

    – zeycus
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:00











  • Are you sure the code that you show in the question is exactly the same as the code that gave you 0.0005772072907971?

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:01











  • Yes, I just recopied from this screen to a new file, and executed it. Same 0.000577 result.

    – zeycus
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:36






  • 2





    Are you on Windows? How did you install scipy? You might be hitting this bug: github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/6882; see also stackoverflow.com/questions/27270044/…

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 17:30















0















I am trying to calculate a straightforward doble definite integral in Python: function Max(0, (4-12x) + (6-12y)) in the square [0,1] x [0,1].



We can do it with Mathematica and get the exact result:



Integrate[Max[0, 4-12*u1 + 6-12*u2], u1, 0, 1, u2, 0,1] = 125/108.


With a simple Monte Carlo simulation I can confirm this result. However, using scipy.integrate.dblquad I am getting a value of 0.0005772072907971, with error 0.0000000000031299



from scipy.integrate import dblquad

def integ(u1, u2):
return max(0, (4 - 12*u1) + (6 - 12*u2))
sol_int, err = dblquad(integ, 0, 1, lambda _:0, lambda _:1, epsabs=1E-12, epsrel=1E-12)
print("dblquad: %0.16f. Error: %0.16f" % (sol_int, err) )


Agreed that the function is not derivable, but it is continuous, I see no reason for this particular integral to be problematic.



I thought maybe dblquad has an 'options' argument where I can try different numerical methods, but I found nothing like that.



So, what am I doing wrong?










share|improve this question

















  • 1





    When I run this using scipy 1.1.0 and numpy 1.15.4, the output is dblquad: 1.1574073869306833. Error: 0.0000000000031299

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 15:16











  • @Warren thank you, very interesting, that would be correct. I see I am using numpy 1.14.3, scipy 1.1.0. Python 3.6.5

    – zeycus
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:00











  • Are you sure the code that you show in the question is exactly the same as the code that gave you 0.0005772072907971?

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:01











  • Yes, I just recopied from this screen to a new file, and executed it. Same 0.000577 result.

    – zeycus
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:36






  • 2





    Are you on Windows? How did you install scipy? You might be hitting this bug: github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/6882; see also stackoverflow.com/questions/27270044/…

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 17:30













0












0








0








I am trying to calculate a straightforward doble definite integral in Python: function Max(0, (4-12x) + (6-12y)) in the square [0,1] x [0,1].



We can do it with Mathematica and get the exact result:



Integrate[Max[0, 4-12*u1 + 6-12*u2], u1, 0, 1, u2, 0,1] = 125/108.


With a simple Monte Carlo simulation I can confirm this result. However, using scipy.integrate.dblquad I am getting a value of 0.0005772072907971, with error 0.0000000000031299



from scipy.integrate import dblquad

def integ(u1, u2):
return max(0, (4 - 12*u1) + (6 - 12*u2))
sol_int, err = dblquad(integ, 0, 1, lambda _:0, lambda _:1, epsabs=1E-12, epsrel=1E-12)
print("dblquad: %0.16f. Error: %0.16f" % (sol_int, err) )


Agreed that the function is not derivable, but it is continuous, I see no reason for this particular integral to be problematic.



I thought maybe dblquad has an 'options' argument where I can try different numerical methods, but I found nothing like that.



So, what am I doing wrong?










share|improve this question














I am trying to calculate a straightforward doble definite integral in Python: function Max(0, (4-12x) + (6-12y)) in the square [0,1] x [0,1].



We can do it with Mathematica and get the exact result:



Integrate[Max[0, 4-12*u1 + 6-12*u2], u1, 0, 1, u2, 0,1] = 125/108.


With a simple Monte Carlo simulation I can confirm this result. However, using scipy.integrate.dblquad I am getting a value of 0.0005772072907971, with error 0.0000000000031299



from scipy.integrate import dblquad

def integ(u1, u2):
return max(0, (4 - 12*u1) + (6 - 12*u2))
sol_int, err = dblquad(integ, 0, 1, lambda _:0, lambda _:1, epsabs=1E-12, epsrel=1E-12)
print("dblquad: %0.16f. Error: %0.16f" % (sol_int, err) )


Agreed that the function is not derivable, but it is continuous, I see no reason for this particular integral to be problematic.



I thought maybe dblquad has an 'options' argument where I can try different numerical methods, but I found nothing like that.



So, what am I doing wrong?







scipy integration






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Nov 12 '18 at 14:59









zeycuszeycus

186113




186113







  • 1





    When I run this using scipy 1.1.0 and numpy 1.15.4, the output is dblquad: 1.1574073869306833. Error: 0.0000000000031299

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 15:16











  • @Warren thank you, very interesting, that would be correct. I see I am using numpy 1.14.3, scipy 1.1.0. Python 3.6.5

    – zeycus
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:00











  • Are you sure the code that you show in the question is exactly the same as the code that gave you 0.0005772072907971?

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:01











  • Yes, I just recopied from this screen to a new file, and executed it. Same 0.000577 result.

    – zeycus
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:36






  • 2





    Are you on Windows? How did you install scipy? You might be hitting this bug: github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/6882; see also stackoverflow.com/questions/27270044/…

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 17:30












  • 1





    When I run this using scipy 1.1.0 and numpy 1.15.4, the output is dblquad: 1.1574073869306833. Error: 0.0000000000031299

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 15:16











  • @Warren thank you, very interesting, that would be correct. I see I am using numpy 1.14.3, scipy 1.1.0. Python 3.6.5

    – zeycus
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:00











  • Are you sure the code that you show in the question is exactly the same as the code that gave you 0.0005772072907971?

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:01











  • Yes, I just recopied from this screen to a new file, and executed it. Same 0.000577 result.

    – zeycus
    Nov 12 '18 at 16:36






  • 2





    Are you on Windows? How did you install scipy? You might be hitting this bug: github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/6882; see also stackoverflow.com/questions/27270044/…

    – Warren Weckesser
    Nov 12 '18 at 17:30







1




1





When I run this using scipy 1.1.0 and numpy 1.15.4, the output is dblquad: 1.1574073869306833. Error: 0.0000000000031299

– Warren Weckesser
Nov 12 '18 at 15:16





When I run this using scipy 1.1.0 and numpy 1.15.4, the output is dblquad: 1.1574073869306833. Error: 0.0000000000031299

– Warren Weckesser
Nov 12 '18 at 15:16













@Warren thank you, very interesting, that would be correct. I see I am using numpy 1.14.3, scipy 1.1.0. Python 3.6.5

– zeycus
Nov 12 '18 at 16:00





@Warren thank you, very interesting, that would be correct. I see I am using numpy 1.14.3, scipy 1.1.0. Python 3.6.5

– zeycus
Nov 12 '18 at 16:00













Are you sure the code that you show in the question is exactly the same as the code that gave you 0.0005772072907971?

– Warren Weckesser
Nov 12 '18 at 16:01





Are you sure the code that you show in the question is exactly the same as the code that gave you 0.0005772072907971?

– Warren Weckesser
Nov 12 '18 at 16:01













Yes, I just recopied from this screen to a new file, and executed it. Same 0.000577 result.

– zeycus
Nov 12 '18 at 16:36





Yes, I just recopied from this screen to a new file, and executed it. Same 0.000577 result.

– zeycus
Nov 12 '18 at 16:36




2




2





Are you on Windows? How did you install scipy? You might be hitting this bug: github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/6882; see also stackoverflow.com/questions/27270044/…

– Warren Weckesser
Nov 12 '18 at 17:30





Are you on Windows? How did you install scipy? You might be hitting this bug: github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/6882; see also stackoverflow.com/questions/27270044/…

– Warren Weckesser
Nov 12 '18 at 17:30












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















1















try different numerical methods




That's what I would suggest, given the trouble that iterated quad has on Windows. After changing it to an explicit two-step process, you can replace one of quad with another method, romberg seems the best alternative to me.



from scipy.integrate import quad, romberg

def integ(u1, u2):
return max(0, (4 - 12*u1) + (6 - 12*u2))

sol_int = romberg(lambda u1: quad(lambda u2: integ(u1, u2), 0, 1)[0], 0, 1)
print("romberg-quad: %0.16f " % sol_int)


This prints 1.1574073959987758 on my computer, and hopefully you will get the same.






share|improve this answer























  • This does solve it, thanks! I did not know about the romberg function.

    – zeycus
    Nov 13 '18 at 8:14










Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53264803%2fscipy-dblquad-providing-the-wrong-result-in-simple-double-integral%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









1















try different numerical methods




That's what I would suggest, given the trouble that iterated quad has on Windows. After changing it to an explicit two-step process, you can replace one of quad with another method, romberg seems the best alternative to me.



from scipy.integrate import quad, romberg

def integ(u1, u2):
return max(0, (4 - 12*u1) + (6 - 12*u2))

sol_int = romberg(lambda u1: quad(lambda u2: integ(u1, u2), 0, 1)[0], 0, 1)
print("romberg-quad: %0.16f " % sol_int)


This prints 1.1574073959987758 on my computer, and hopefully you will get the same.






share|improve this answer























  • This does solve it, thanks! I did not know about the romberg function.

    – zeycus
    Nov 13 '18 at 8:14















1















try different numerical methods




That's what I would suggest, given the trouble that iterated quad has on Windows. After changing it to an explicit two-step process, you can replace one of quad with another method, romberg seems the best alternative to me.



from scipy.integrate import quad, romberg

def integ(u1, u2):
return max(0, (4 - 12*u1) + (6 - 12*u2))

sol_int = romberg(lambda u1: quad(lambda u2: integ(u1, u2), 0, 1)[0], 0, 1)
print("romberg-quad: %0.16f " % sol_int)


This prints 1.1574073959987758 on my computer, and hopefully you will get the same.






share|improve this answer























  • This does solve it, thanks! I did not know about the romberg function.

    – zeycus
    Nov 13 '18 at 8:14













1












1








1








try different numerical methods




That's what I would suggest, given the trouble that iterated quad has on Windows. After changing it to an explicit two-step process, you can replace one of quad with another method, romberg seems the best alternative to me.



from scipy.integrate import quad, romberg

def integ(u1, u2):
return max(0, (4 - 12*u1) + (6 - 12*u2))

sol_int = romberg(lambda u1: quad(lambda u2: integ(u1, u2), 0, 1)[0], 0, 1)
print("romberg-quad: %0.16f " % sol_int)


This prints 1.1574073959987758 on my computer, and hopefully you will get the same.






share|improve this answer














try different numerical methods




That's what I would suggest, given the trouble that iterated quad has on Windows. After changing it to an explicit two-step process, you can replace one of quad with another method, romberg seems the best alternative to me.



from scipy.integrate import quad, romberg

def integ(u1, u2):
return max(0, (4 - 12*u1) + (6 - 12*u2))

sol_int = romberg(lambda u1: quad(lambda u2: integ(u1, u2), 0, 1)[0], 0, 1)
print("romberg-quad: %0.16f " % sol_int)


This prints 1.1574073959987758 on my computer, and hopefully you will get the same.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Nov 13 '18 at 4:43







user6655984



















  • This does solve it, thanks! I did not know about the romberg function.

    – zeycus
    Nov 13 '18 at 8:14

















  • This does solve it, thanks! I did not know about the romberg function.

    – zeycus
    Nov 13 '18 at 8:14
















This does solve it, thanks! I did not know about the romberg function.

– zeycus
Nov 13 '18 at 8:14





This does solve it, thanks! I did not know about the romberg function.

– zeycus
Nov 13 '18 at 8:14

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53264803%2fscipy-dblquad-providing-the-wrong-result-in-simple-double-integral%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

How to how show current date and time by default on contact form 7 in WordPress without taking input from user in datetimepicker

Syphilis

Darth Vader #20