Infinite loop in Newton bisection - fortran

program main
implicit none
double precision x0, a, b
x0 = -3
call findzero(x0)
contains
function f(x)
implicit none
double precision x,f
f = SIN(x) - exp(-x)
end function
function fprime(x)
implicit none
double precision fprime, x
fprime = COS(x) + exp(-x)
end function
subroutine findbracket(x0,a,b)
implicit none
double precision x0, a, b
double precision fa, fb
double precision dx
dx = 0.001d0
a = x0
b = x0
do
fa = f(a)
fb = f(b)
!print*,"bracket[", a, b, "]"
a = a - dx
if (fa*fb < 0) then
exit
end if
b = b + dx
if (fa*fb < 0) then
exit
end if
dx = dx*2
end do
end subroutine
subroutine findzero(x0)
implicit none
double precision x0, a, b
double precision p, tol
while (x0 <11) do
x0 = -3
print*, "what is x0", x0
call findbracket(x0,a,b)
call newtonbisection (p,a,b,tol)
print*, "this is x0, x", x0, p
x0 = x0 + 1
end do
end subroutine
Using this subroutine I am trying to solve for the zeros of
f(x) = sinx - e^-x
with x0 = -3, -2, ..., 10.
I have working subroutines findbracket and newtonbisection. Using findbracket I intend to get [a,b] and using those a and b, I want to find p for each x0.
When I compile, my code falls into an infinite loop, I tried it with commenting out
call newtonbisection (p,a,b,tol)
so I assume the problem is with findbracket. But if I just use the subroutine to find [a,b] with x0 = -3, it works but not when I combine them.
Why do I have an infinite loop?

Let's narrow this loop down:
do while (x0 < 11)
x0 = -3
call findbracket(x0, a, b)
x0 = x0 + 1
end do
This is a loop that gets executed as long as x0 is smaller than eleven. Inside the loop, you explicitly set x0 to minus 3, then call a subroutine that uses x0, finally increment x0
I didn't see any location inside the findbracket routine where the value of x0 would be changed, so it will still be -3 at the end of the call. Then it gets incremented by one, so it's now -2, which is still smaller than 11, so the loop starts again. The first thing it does is to reset x0 to -3, and the whole spiel starts at the same point again.
So the condition x0 < 11 will always be true, since in every iteration, x0 will get reset to -3. The loop will never exit. Your program hangs.
You need to move the x0 = -3 to before the loop, like this:
x0 = -3
do while (x0 < 11)
call findbracket(x0, a, b)
x0 = x0 + 1
end do
That way, x0 won't get reset to -3 in every iteration of the loop and will eventually become larger than 11 so that the loop ends.

An "infinite" for loop is achieved as follows:
do
** Some executable statements
if (conditional_statement) exit
end do
In brief, a set of statements are executed repetitively until the conditional statement is satisfied, that is,
conditional_statement .eqv. .true.
When this occurs, program control jumps to the next executable statement immediately following the do construct.

Related

if statement to determine steady-state

My code below correctly solves a 1D heat equation for a function u(x,t). I now want to find the steady-state solution, the solution that no longer changes in time so it should satisfy u(t+1)-u(t) = 0. What is the most efficient way to find the steady-state solution? I show three different attempts below, but I'm not sure if either are actually doing what I want. The first and third have correct syntax, the second method has a syntax error due to the if statement. Each method is different due to the change in the if structure.
Method 1 :
program parabolic1
integer, parameter :: n = 10, m = 20
real, parameter :: h = 0.1, k = 0.005 !step sizes
real, dimension (0:n) :: u,v
integer:: i,j
real::pi,pi2
u(0) = 0.0; v(0) = 0.0; u(n) = 0.0; v(n) =0.0
pi = 4.0*atan(1.0)
pi2 = pi*pi
do i=1, n-1
u(i) = sin( pi*real(i)*h)
end do
do j = 1,m
do i = 1, n-1
v(i) = 0.5*(u(i-1)+u(i+1))
end do
t = real(j)*k !increment in time, now check for steady-state
!steady-state check: this checks the solutions at every space point which I don't think is correct.
do i = 1,n-1
if ( v(i) - u(i) .LT. 1.0e-7 ) then
print*, 'steady-state condition reached'
exit
end if
end do
do i = 1, n-1 !updating solution
u(i) = v(i)
end do
end do
end program parabolic1
Method 2 :
program parabolic1
integer, parameter :: n = 10, m = 20
real, parameter :: h = 0.1, k = 0.005 !step sizes
real, dimension (0:n) :: u,v
integer:: i,j
real::pi,pi2
u(0) = 0.0; v(0) = 0.0; u(n) = 0.0; v(n) =0.0
pi = 4.0*atan(1.0)
pi2 = pi*pi
do i=1, n-1
u(i) = sin( pi*real(i)*h)
end do
do j = 1,m
do i = 1, n-1
v(i) = 0.5*(u(i-1)+u(i+1))
end do
t = real(j)*k !increment in time, now check for steady-state
!steady-state check: (This gives an error message since the if statement doesn't have a logical scalar expression, but I want to compare the full arrays v and u as shown.
if ( v - u .LT. 1.0e-7 ) then
print*, 'steady-state condition reached'
exit
end if
do i = 1, n-1 !updating solution
u(i) = v(i)
end do
end do
end program parabolic1
Method 3 :
program parabolic1
integer, parameter :: n = 10, m = 20
real, parameter :: h = 0.1, k = 0.005 !step sizes
real, dimension (0:n) :: u,v
integer:: i,j
real::pi,pi2
u(0) = 0.0; v(0) = 0.0; u(n) = 0.0; v(n) =0.0
pi = 4.0*atan(1.0)
pi2 = pi*pi
do i=1, n-1
u(i) = sin( pi*real(i)*h)
end do
do j = 1,m
do i = 1, n-1
v(i) = 0.5*(u(i-1)+u(i+1))
end do
t = real(j)*k !increment in time, now check for steady-state
!steady-state check: Perhaps this is the correct expression I want to use
if( norm2(v) - norm2(u) .LT. 1.0e-7 ) then
print*, 'steady-state condition reached'
exit
end if
do i = 1, n-1 !updating solution
u(i) = v(i)
end do
end do
end program parabolic1
Without discussing which method to determine "closeness" is best or correct (not really being a programming problem) we can focus on what the Fortran parts of the methods are doing.
Method 1 and Method 2 are similar ideas (but broken in their execution), while Method 3 is different (and broken in another way).
Note also that in general one wants to compare the magnitude of the difference abs(v-u) rather than the (signed) difference v-u. With non-monotonic changes over iterations these are quite different.
Method 3 uses norm2(v) - norm2(u) to test whether the arrays u and v are similar. This isn't correct. Consider
norm2([1.,0.])-norm2([0.,1.])
instead of the more correct
norm2([1.,0.]-[0.,1.])
Method 2's
if ( v - u .LT. 1.0e-7 ) then
has the problem of being an invalid array expression, but the "are all points close?" can be written appropriately as
if ( ALL( v - u .LT. 1.0e-7 )) then
(You'll find other questions around here about such array reductions).
Method 1 tries something similar, but incorrectly:
do i = 1,n-1
if ( v(i) - u(i) .LT. 1.0e-7 ) then
print*, 'steady-state condition reached'
exit
end if
end do
This is incorrect in one big way, and one subtle way.
First, the loop is exited when the condition tests true the first time, with a message saying the steady state is reached. This is incorrect: you need all values close, while this is testing for any value close.
Second, when the condition is met, you exit. But you don't exit the time iteration loop, you exit the closeness testing loop. (exit without a construct name leaves the innermost do construct). You'll be in exactly the same situation, running again immediately after this innermost construct whether the tested condition is ever or never met (if ever met you'll get the message also). You will need to use a construct name on the time loop.
I won't show how to do that (again there are other questions here about that), because you also need to fix the test condition, by which point you'll be better off using if(all(... (corrected Method 2) without that additional do construct.
For Methods 1 and 2 you'll have something like:
if (all(v-u .lt 1e-7)) then
print *, "Converged"
exit
end if
And for Method 3:
if (norm2(v-u) .lt. 1e-7) then
print *, "Converged"
exit
end if

Can't input value in f(x) in this Fortran code?

program prob_1
implicit real*8(a-h, o-z)
f(x) = x**2-cos(x)
df(x) = 2*x+sin(x)
x0 = 0, x1 = 1
do i = 1, 3
if (f((x0+x1)/2) < 0)
x0 = (x0+x1)/2
else
x1 = (x0+x1)/2
end do
print *,"x = ", x
end program
I'm just starting to use Fortran 90.
Now I'm using Code::blocks but I don't know exactly which line the error exists on.
I guess the problem is f((x0+x1)/2) < 0 but don't know actually what is the real error.
what's problem is here?
Be advised that statement functions, the function definitions the OP uses, are obsolescent.
B.3.4 Statement functions
Statement functions are subject to a number of non intuitive restrictions and are a potential source of error because their syntax is easily confused with that of an assignment statement.
The internal function is a more generalized form of the statement function and completely supersedes it.
source: F2018 Standard
Also the notation REAL*8 or anything of that form has never been part of any Fortran standard (see here):
I would suggest to rewrite the code as:
program prob_1
implicit none
double precision :: x1,x0
integer :: i
x0 = 0; x1 = 1
do i = 1, 3
if (f((x0+x1)/2.0D0) < 0) then
x0 = (x0+x1)/2.0D0
else
x1 = (x0+x1)/2.0D0
endif
end do
print *,"x = ", (x0+x1)/2.0D0
contains
function f(x)
double precision, intent(in) :: x
double precision :: f
f = x**2-cos(x)
end function f
function df(x)
double precision, intent(in) :: x
double precision :: df
df = 2.0D0*x+sin(x)
end function df
end program
If you change your program as follows then it will compile:
program prob_1
implicit real*8(a-h, o-z)
f(x) = x**2-cos(x)
df(x) = 2*x+sin(x)
x0 = 0; x1 = 1
do i = 1, 3
if (f((x0+x1)/2) < 0) then
x0 = (x0+x1)/2
else
x1 = (x0+x1)/2
endif
end do
print *,"x = ", x
end program
As mentionned in the comments, you have to add the semicolon ; to separate statements in one line and you have to add the then as well as endif to your if condition.
Hope it helps.

How to calculate Pi using Monte Carlo Simulation?

I'm attempting to write a FORTRAN 90 program that calculates Pi using random numbers. These are the steps I know I need to undertake:
Create a randomly placed point on a 2D surface within the range [−1, 1] for x and y, using call random_number(x).
calculate how far away the point is from the origin, i'll need to do both of these steps for N points.
for each N value work out the total amount of points that are less than 1 away from origin. Calculate pi with A=4pir^2
use a do loop to calculate pi as a function of N and output it to a data file. then plot it in a graphing package.
This is what I have:
program pi
implicit none
integer :: count, n, i
real :: r, x, y
count = 0
CALL RANDOM_SEED
DO i = 1, n
CALL RANDOM_NUMBER(x)
CALL RANDOM_NUMBER(y)
IF (x*x + y*Y <1.0) count = count + 1
END DO
r = 4 * REAL(count)/n
print *, r
end program pi
I know i've missed out printing the results to the data file, i'm not sure on how to implement this.
This program gives me a nice value for pi (3.149..), but how can I implement step 4, so that it outputs values for pi as a function of N?
Thanks.
Here is an attempt to further #meowgoesthedog effort...
Program pi
implicit none
integer :: count, n, i
real :: r, x, y
count = 0
Integer, parameter :: Slice_o_Pie = 8
Integer :: Don_McLean
Logical :: Purr = .FALSE.
OPEN(NEWUNIT=Don_McLean, FILE='American.Pie')
CALL RANDOM_SEED
DO i = 1, n
CALL RANDOM_NUMBER(x)
CALL RANDOM_NUMBER(y)
IF (x*x + y*Y <1.0) count = count + 1
Purr = .FALSE.
IF(MODULO(I, Slice_o_Pie) == 0) Purr = .TRUE.
IF (Purr) THEN
r = 4 * REAL(count)/i
print *, i, r
WRITE(LUN,*) 'I=',I,'Pi=',Pi
END IF
END DO
CLOSE(Don_McLean)
end program pi
Simply put the final calculation step inside the outer loop, and replace n with i. Also maybe add a condition to limit the number of results printed, e.g. i % 100 = 0 to print every 100 iterations.
program pi
implicit none
integer :: count, n, i
real :: r, x, y
count = 0
CALL RANDOM_SEED
DO i = 1, n
CALL RANDOM_NUMBER(x)
CALL RANDOM_NUMBER(y)
IF (x*x + y*Y <1.0) count = count + 1
IF ([condition])
r = 4 * REAL(count)/i
print *, i, r
END IF
END DO
end program pi

Shooting method in fortran (neutron star oscillation)

I have been writing a script in fortran 90 for solving the radial oscillation problem of a neutron star with the use of shooting method. But for unknown reason, my program never works out. Without the shooting method component, the program runs smoothly as it successfully constructed the star. But once the shooting comes in, everything dies.
PROGRAM ROSCILLATION2
USE eos_parameters
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER ::i, j, k, l
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: N_ode = 5
REAL, DIMENSION(N_ode) :: y
REAL(8) :: rho0_cgs, rho0, P0, r0, phi0, pi
REAL(8) :: r, rend, mass, P, phi, delta, xi, eta
REAL(8) :: step, omega, omegastep, tiny, rho_print, Radius, B, a2, s0, lamda, E0, E
EXTERNAL :: fcn
!!!! User input
rho0_cgs = 2.D+15 !central density in cgs unit
step = 1.D-4 ! step size dr
omegastep = 1.D-2 ! step size d(omega)
tiny = 1.D-8 ! small number P(R)/P(0) to define star surface
!!!!!!!!!
open(unit=15, file="data.dat", status="new")
pi = ACOS(-1.D0)
a2 =((((1.6022D-13)**4)*(6.674D-11)*((2.997D8)**-7)*((1.0546D-34)**-3)*(1.D6))**(0.5D0))*a2_MeV !convert to code unit (km^-1)
B = ((1.6022D-13)**4)*(6.674D-11)*((2.997D8)**-7)*((1.0546D-34)**-3)*(1.D6)*B_MeV !convert to code unit (km^-2)
s0 = (1.D0/3.D0) - (1/(6*pi**2))*a2*((1/(16*pi**2)*a2**2 + (pi**-2)*a4*(rho0 - B))**-0.5) !square of the spped of sound at r=0
lamda = -0.5D0*log(1-2*y(1)/r)
E0 = (r0**-2)*s0*exp(lamda + 3*phi0)
rho0 = rho0_cgs*6.67D-18 / 9.D0 !convert rho0 to code unit (km^-2)
!! Calculate central pressure P0
P0 = (1.D0/3.D0)*rho0 - (4.D0/3.D0)*B - (1.D0/(a4*(12.D0)*(pi**2)))*a2**2 - &
&(a2/((3.D0)*a4))*(((1.D0/(16.D0*pi**4))*a2**2+(1.D0/(pi**2))*a4*(rho0-B))**0.5D0)
!! initial value for metric function phi
phi0 = 0.1D0 ! arbitrary (needed to be adjusted later)
r0 = 1.D-30 ! integration starting point
!! Set initial conditions
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!Start integration loop
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
r = r0
y(1) = 0.D0
y(2) = P0
y(3) = phi0
y(4) = 1/(3*E0)
y(5) = 1
omega = 2*pi*1000/(2.997D5) !omega of 1kHz in code unit
DO l = 1, 1000
omega = omega + omegastep !shooting method part
DO i = 1, 1000000000
rend = r0 + REAL(i)*step
call oderk(r,rend,y,N_ode,fcn)
r = rend
mass = y(1)
P = y(2)
phi = y(3)
xi = y(4)
eta = y(5)
IF (P < tiny*P0) THEN
WRITE(*,*) "Central density (10^14 cgs) = ", rho0_cgs/1.D14
WRITE(*,*) " Mass (solar mass) = ", mass/1.477D0
WRITE(*,*) " Radius (km) = ", r
WRITE(*,*) " Compactness M/R ", mass/r
WRITE(15,*) (omega*2.997D5/(2*pi)), y(5)
GOTO 21
ENDIF
ENDDO
ENDDO
21 CONTINUE
END PROGRAM roscillation2
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SUBROUTINE fcn(r,y,yprime)
USE eos_parameters
IMPLICIT NONE
REAL(8), DIMENSION(5) :: y, yprime
REAL(8) :: r, m, P, phi, rho, pi, B, a2, xi, eta, W, Q, E, s, lamda, omega
INTEGER :: j
pi = ACOS(-1.D0)
a2 =((((1.6022D-13)**4)*(6.674D-11)*((2.997D8)**-7)*((1.0546D-34)**-3)*(1.D6))**(0.5D0))*a2_MeV !convert to code unit (km^-1)
B = ((1.6022D-13)**4)*(6.674D-11)*((2.997D8)**-7)*((1.0546D-34)**-3)*(1.D6)*B_MeV !convert to code unit (km^-2)
m = y(1)
P = y(2)
phi = y(3)
xi = y(4)
eta = y(5)
rho = 3.D0*P + 4.D0*B +((3.D0)/(4.D0*a4*(pi**2)))*a2**2+(a2/a4)*&
&(((9.D0/((16.D0)*(pi**4)))*a2**2+((3.D0/(pi**2))*a4*(P+B)))**0.5D0)
s = (1.D0/3.D0) - (1/(6*pi**2))*a2*((1/(16*pi**2)*a2**2 + (pi**-2)*a4*(rho - B))**-0.5) !square of speed of sound
W = (r**-2)*(rho + P)*exp(3*lamda + phi)
E = (r**-2)*s*exp(lamda + 3*phi)
Q = (r**-2)*exp(lamda + 3*phi)*(rho + P)*((yprime(3)**2) + 4*(r**-1)*yprime(3)- 8*pi*P*exp(2*lamda))
yprime(1) = 4.D0*pi*rho*r**2
yprime(2) = - (rho + P)*(m + 4.D0*pi*P*r**3)/(r*(r-2.D0*m))
yprime(3) = (m + 4.D0*pi*P*r**3)/(r*(r-2.D0*m))
yprime(4) = y(5)/(3*E)
yprime(5) = -(W*omega**2 + Q)*y(4)
END SUBROUTINE fcn
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
!! Runge-Kutta method (from Numerical Recipes)
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
subroutine oderk(ri,re,y,n,derivs)
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: NMAX=16
REAL(8) :: ri, re, step
REAL(8), DIMENSION(NMAX) :: y, dydx, yout
EXTERNAL :: derivs,rk4
call derivs(ri,y,dydx)
step=re-ri
CALL rk4(y,dydx,n,ri,step,yout,derivs)
do i=1,n
y(i)=yout(i)
enddo
return
end subroutine oderk
SUBROUTINE RK4(Y,DYDX,N,X,H,YOUT,DERIVS)
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: NMAX=16
REAL(8) :: H,HH,XH,X,H6
REAL(8), DIMENSION(N) :: Y, DYDX, YOUT
REAL(8), DIMENSION(NMAX) :: YT, DYT, DYM
EXTERNAL :: derivs
HH=H*0.5D0
H6=H/6D0
XH=X+HH
DO I=1,N
YT(I)=Y(I)+HH*DYDX(I)
ENDDO
CALL DERIVS(XH,YT,DYT)
DO I=1,N
YT(I)=Y(I)+HH*DYT(I)
ENDDO
CALL DERIVS(XH,YT,DYM)
DO I=1,N
YT(I)=Y(I)+H*DYM(I)
DYM(I)=DYT(I)+DYM(I)
ENDDO
CALL DERIVS(X+H,YT,DYT)
DO I=1,N
YOUT(I)=Y(I)+H6*(DYDX(I)+DYT(I)+2*DYM(I))
ENDDO
END SUBROUTINE RK4
Any reply would be great i am just really depressed for the long debugging.
Your program is blowing up because of this line:
yprime(5) = -(W*omega**2 + Q)*y(4)
in subroutine fcn. In this subroutine, omega is completely independent of the one declared in your main program. This one is uninitialized and used in an expression, which will either contain random values or zero, if your compiler is nice enough (or told) to initialize variables.
If you want the variable omega from your main program to be the same variable you use in fcn then you need to pass that variable to fcn somehow. Due to the way you've architected this program, passing it would require modifying all of your procedures to pass omega so that it can be provided to all of your calls to DERIVS (which is the dummy argument you are associating with fcn).
An alternative would be to put omega into a module and use that module where you need access to omega, e.g. declare it in eos_parameters instead of declaring it in the scoping units of fcn and your main program.

How to deal/handle with this error when use nconf function in IMSL library?

I used the function nconf in IMSL library to solve a constrained nonlinear optimization problem. I simplified the problem to describe the error occurred.
The objective function is log(x1 * x2 - x3 ^ 2). The constrain is x1 * x2 - x3 ^ 2 > 0. The fortran code is as followed.
program main
use IMSL
integer IBTYPE, IPRINT, M, MAXITN, ME, N
parameter (IBTYPE = 0, IPRINT = 0, M = 1, MAXITN = 100, ME = 0, N = 3)
real FVALUE, X(N), XGUESS(N), XLB(N), XSCALE(N), XUB(N)
external FCN
data XGUESS/10.0E0, 10.0E0, 2.0E0/, XSCALE/3*1.0E0/
data XLB/1.0E-6, 1.0E-6, 1E-6/, XUB/50, 50, 50/
!open(44, file = "test.txt", status = "unknown")
call NCONF(FCN, M, ME, N, XGUESS, IBTYPE, XLB, XUB, XSCALE, IPRINT, MAXITN, X, FVALUE)
!write(*, *) X
end program
subroutine FCN(M, ME, N, X, ACTIVE, F, G)
integer M, ME, N
real X(3), F, G(*)
logical ACTIVE(*)
ACTIVE(1) = .TRUE.
!write(44, *) x
F = log(x(1) * x(2) - x(3) ** 2)
!write(44, *) F
IF(ACTIVE(1)) G(1) = X(1) * x(2) - x(3) ** 2
return
end subroutine
When I ran the code, the constraint doesn't work. nconf do search a (x1, x2, x3) that makes x1 * x2 - x3 ^ 2 < 0, but then the program throw an exception.x1 * x2 - x3 ^ 2 is in the log function . It can't be negative. If the constrain works, x1 * x2 - x3 ^ 2 should not be negative.
I don't know how the nconf function search point x and how the constrain works.
elaborating on my comment, the only way the solver learns what the constraints are is by going 'out of bounds' , so you should very much expect out of bounds values and handle them gracefully.
A typical way to do this is:
G(1) = X(1) * x(2) - x(3) ** 2
if(g(1).gt.0)then
f=log(g(1))
else
f=-10.e30
endif
It may not matter what you return in the out of bounds case but check the docs for the imsl routine to see if it says something about that.
just by the way, note since you hard coded active(1)=.true. there is no need for the if(active(1)).. construct.