The Jacobi Method

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 22 ноя 2024

Комментарии • 151

  • @josephmcdonald6601
    @josephmcdonald6601 5 лет назад +91

    5 years later still saving lives, thank you !

  • @watermanOIT
    @watermanOIT  5 лет назад +69

    Glad to be a lifesaver, Joseph! I retired a year ago, thinking maybe I'd bust out some other videos in my newfound free time, but I seem to have gotten distracted by other fun projects!

  • @angieowih181
    @angieowih181 Год назад +3

    9 years later and it's still useful 😊😊😊😊 thank you

  • @iamebson
    @iamebson Год назад

    Full semester of running from this and procrastinating. Less than 3hrs to the exam and here i am.... You're stil saving lives

  • @connorskudlarek8598
    @connorskudlarek8598 7 лет назад +19

    Thanks professor Waterman. I'm preparing for Fogarty's test tomorrow, and totally found this helpful as I have been too ill to attend class and missed these lectures.

  • @decreer4567
    @decreer4567 Год назад +2

    Simple elegantly explained and straight to the point. You’re amazing at teaching.

  • @KalashVodka175
    @KalashVodka175 Год назад

    This is one of the best no-bullshit explanation for the Jacobi method. ManyThank s!

  • @corneliatomson1506
    @corneliatomson1506 4 года назад +2

    2020 Still saving lives here..Thank you from Greece!!

  • @jonathantan92
    @jonathantan92 10 лет назад +138

    Is the x1 for 3rd iteration=1.175 instead of 0.815?

    • @watermanOIT
      @watermanOIT  10 лет назад +70

      Yes, you are correct, Jonathan! Everyone else take note...

    • @jonathantan92
      @jonathantan92 10 лет назад +14

      Gregg Waterman Anyway, thank you Gregg for the videos. Very informative and easy to understand. Cheers!

    • @sanchilanadeeshan
      @sanchilanadeeshan 7 лет назад +5

      Jonathan Tan thank you so much

    • @coliwemoyo3941
      @coliwemoyo3941 4 года назад +1

      @@watermanOIT thank you for the video but more importantly for the correction

    • @lukmanalghdamsi3189
      @lukmanalghdamsi3189 2 года назад +2

      i was like ahhh what the hell i am doing wrong.

  • @inebriatedengineering6288
    @inebriatedengineering6288 Год назад +37

    The 3rd iteration of x1 should be 1.175, not 0.815; correct me if I'm wrong.

    • @pabloamaelwiwi
      @pabloamaelwiwi Год назад +5

      Yes, it's 1.175

    • @noahheyn6026
      @noahheyn6026 9 месяцев назад +3

      omg i was so confused!!!

    • @Akin-ife
      @Akin-ife 8 месяцев назад +2

      You're right

    • @HashemAljifri515
      @HashemAljifri515 7 месяцев назад +1

      Definitely true !

    • @darkflames190
      @darkflames190 4 месяца назад +1

      ok that 's good to know, i almost want to throw my sci cal due to the confusion on the vid

  • @AlphaNovaImploder
    @AlphaNovaImploder 7 лет назад +3

    Really good tutorial taught me what my lecturer couldnt

  • @ImpiantoFacile
    @ImpiantoFacile 5 лет назад +1

    If only our teacher explained it to us this way.... Thanks, you saved me.

  • @rastik7012
    @rastik7012 3 года назад +1

    2021 still valuable thx :D . It even reminded me of those old good times of windows 7

  • @AsaNole
    @AsaNole 5 лет назад +10

    I must commend your ability to ignore the blinking icon in the taskbar, haha. Thanks for the explanation.

  • @georgejeffery6301
    @georgejeffery6301 3 года назад

    Always appreciate all your help and support ❤️, thanks

  • @kiplangatedwin1439
    @kiplangatedwin1439 2 года назад +2

    Saving me,8 years later

  • @vutuch4865
    @vutuch4865 Год назад

    Oh boy, you just saved my MatLab homework!

  • @vitoralves9850
    @vitoralves9850 9 лет назад +8

    simple and clean. Thank you

  • @nabilalmarfadi7748
    @nabilalmarfadi7748 8 лет назад +22

    i would state a mistake :) x1 second iteration
    where :-
    (12+( -3.15) -2(1.5) ) /5 - is not equal 0.815 - its 1.175 *

  • @calfoniahlesenya5005
    @calfoniahlesenya5005 Год назад

    9 years later, still saving lives!

  • @danielstewart3881
    @danielstewart3881 5 лет назад

    thank you. this was so much easier to understand than the way my professor explained it.

  • @skm2
    @skm2 Год назад

    when you post this i was in the 8 class and now I'm in the 3 stage in uni wow

  • @raniahamadache2218
    @raniahamadache2218 2 года назад

    I love how easy you made it for us thank you sir!

  • @rachelcyr4306
    @rachelcyr4306 4 года назад

    Thanks for explaining this! I am in health data science masters and have to write a python fx for this. I was freaking out after doing some reading trying to understand what I was doing

  • @HassaanRaza
    @HassaanRaza 5 лет назад

    simple and best explanation

  • @daalwada
    @daalwada 6 лет назад +4

    Thanks for lucid explanation... You saved my day! And I assume that we need to iterate unless we get correct approximations where further approximation is not possible...
    Thanks and subscribed 😇

  • @ovauandjahera8664
    @ovauandjahera8664 Год назад

    This is realy helpful. Recieve my thanks oh sir.

  • @thetrianglewaffle
    @thetrianglewaffle 4 года назад

    Excellent explanation. Thank you

  • @francisbroomfi7964
    @francisbroomfi7964 3 года назад

    6years and still saving lives

  • @klajdimyftari4691
    @klajdimyftari4691 7 лет назад

    Thank you very much, I'm having a test in the next 2 days, I hope this will help me very much :)

  • @evdiddy2478
    @evdiddy2478 8 лет назад

    +Gregg Waterman can you make a video on successive over-relaxation method?

  • @kjairam296
    @kjairam296 2 года назад

    the answer after rounding off is x1=1,x2=-3,x3=2

  • @dansedanse1173
    @dansedanse1173 2 года назад

    great video, love how you explain it

  • @qtho0905
    @qtho0905 2 года назад

    this man is **ing great

  • @UkkosTukki
    @UkkosTukki 3 года назад

    Thanks! Very clearly put.

  • @matyasdittrich1977
    @matyasdittrich1977 3 года назад

    Thank you for your education !

  • @VitoxCzechia
    @VitoxCzechia 4 года назад

    Thanks so much for making this video.

  • @TheGadiscoklat
    @TheGadiscoklat 5 лет назад

    Keep up the good work

  • @isdorycostantine
    @isdorycostantine Год назад

    Thankx for that, but I have noted the value for x1 =1.175

  • @usthbgp6470
    @usthbgp6470 8 лет назад

    very well done, thank you so much Sir !!
    merci infiniment

  • @prakashc761
    @prakashc761 9 лет назад +2

    Hi,
    How do you calculate the errors like a relative error, absolute error and residual error for this example?
    Thank you

  • @danieleucci1890
    @danieleucci1890 10 лет назад +2

    Hi Gregg, do you not subtract the old x1 from the new x1 then divide all by the new x1 and multiply by 100 (like Gauss Seigal method) to get the iteration %

  • @Edi_Moyo
    @Edi_Moyo 2 года назад

    Thank you for this video

  • @mohammadjubayerhasan8914
    @mohammadjubayerhasan8914 Месяц назад

    10 years later..watching it

  • @SaraG1007
    @SaraG1007 8 лет назад +1

    It was really helpful, thanks!

  • @Kevin-gz7th
    @Kevin-gz7th 3 года назад

    Hie Gregg, say we do not know the exact solution, How do we know if we have obtained the right value for either X1 , X2 OR X3. Also when we get the value for X1 , does that mean all the other values are now correct?

  • @jaysonhidalgo3725
    @jaysonhidalgo3725 4 года назад

    The iterations should start at zero since it's initial instead of starting at 1 when we look at the table right? We are assuming the initial guess is zero not the guess at iteration 1.

  • @samueldwomor8590
    @samueldwomor8590 4 месяца назад

    Thank you Sir 🙏

  • @hussainaliansiran5762
    @hussainaliansiran5762 Год назад

    god bless you prof

  • @mathscraw3741
    @mathscraw3741 2 года назад

    That thing on the taskbar flickering all throughout the video made me sick.

  • @djbhobloft
    @djbhobloft 4 года назад

    thanks for sharing bro

  • @MA-qz1sd
    @MA-qz1sd 3 года назад

    compare this explanation with the one from the textbook, day vs night

  • @abraham6892
    @abraham6892 3 года назад

    so, once you have reached the correct values for all 3 variables, the iterations beyond that will continue to give the same values over and over? I am assuming thats when you know you are right, right?

  • @giftsadique1806
    @giftsadique1806 Год назад

    Very clear but I just wanted to ask, at what point do we stop iterating?

    • @projit3380
      @projit3380 7 месяцев назад

      Usually it's good to have around 10 iterations and by then yiu usually have an idea of the number the devimal places are trying to reach to.

  • @bellam.2865
    @bellam.2865 4 года назад

    such a life saver!!!

  • @aj-adjei
    @aj-adjei 3 года назад

    How do you know when to stop the iterations? Are you provided with the solutions at the start? Or is there going to be a consistency in results at a point to tell that we're at the solutions?

    • @paulaiscool7648
      @paulaiscool7648 2 года назад

      have you got an answer ? because that was also my exactquestion :)

    • @dragonthese
      @dragonthese 2 года назад

      Your solutions are going to start converging after n iterations, or sometimes question would state number of iterations to be used. First check for convergence criteria in system of linear equation, hope this helps ;)

  • @fawzy_aboelhasan
    @fawzy_aboelhasan Год назад

    There is a mistake in the result of first value in third column

  • @lesliekollerprivate5062
    @lesliekollerprivate5062 7 лет назад +1

    When computing x1 in the third iteration I get 1.175.

  • @gadisadaba7627
    @gadisadaba7627 5 лет назад

    Thank you Sir!

  • @stevenjops1424
    @stevenjops1424 8 лет назад

    how we use zero approximation =0 and use the dependence values on it why we do not take zero approximation equall to 1 or 2 or 3 or any thing and depend on the values depend on them?

  • @tutstorial8474
    @tutstorial8474 4 года назад

    when do we stop iterating?

  • @syedusamamanzoor1838
    @syedusamamanzoor1838 8 лет назад +1

    How do we confirm that we have reached the solution point and we don't need further iterations? does it relate to the difference b/w values obtained from subsequent iterations?

  • @mehwishkhalid1016
    @mehwishkhalid1016 7 лет назад

    How can find absolute error for each iteration in jacobi method

  • @smit17xp
    @smit17xp 3 года назад

    thanks. this helped a lot

  • @magdalenabezova5826
    @magdalenabezova5826 Год назад

    how it will work if i have 6x6

  • @theking-eo1yt
    @theking-eo1yt 3 года назад

    فلتحظك الالهه
    حفظك الاله امون

  • @tadiwanashemoyo1533
    @tadiwanashemoyo1533 2 года назад

    Perfect 5star💥

  • @zohrak8715
    @zohrak8715 8 лет назад +2

    but when do we stop the iterations???

    • @corvo9029
      @corvo9029 8 лет назад +1

      when you can see that numbers dont change much :) it means that you have mistaken possibly little.

  • @gulamali8208
    @gulamali8208 2 года назад

    After 8 iterations
    My answer came out
    X1=1
    X2=3
    X3=2

  • @nurkenabdurakhmanov779
    @nurkenabdurakhmanov779 4 года назад

    What is the difference between Gauss- Seidel method and Jacobi method?

    • @watermanOIT
      @watermanOIT  3 года назад +1

      A bit late, but... with Jacobi you calculate values for each of the variables using all three previous values, then "update" them all at once. With Gauss-Seidel you keep updating each variable as you go. This is why you usually get faster convergence with Gauss-Seidel.

  • @Kopellis
    @Kopellis 8 лет назад +7

    Why would you ever use jacobi instead of gauss siedel?

    • @KraziAzian
      @KraziAzian 8 лет назад +53

      +Chrispollis When a test question forces you to use it

    • @SpaceMarine113
      @SpaceMarine113 8 лет назад

      +Chrispollis i'm interested in this as well,good question

    • @watermanOIT
      @watermanOIT  8 лет назад +9

      Very good question whose answer I do not know! As a teacher, I would say that learning the Jacobi method might make learning Gauss-Seidel a tiny bit easier to learn!

    • @syedusamamanzoor1838
      @syedusamamanzoor1838 8 лет назад +5

      just because it might be asked in the exam to solve the question from Jaobi's method :3 :v

    • @thechanstep
      @thechanstep 8 лет назад +11

      A situation where you would use Jacobi over Gauss-Seidel is when you have a large system of linear equations and within each iteration you want to compute x1, x2, ..., xn in parallel. You can do that with Jacobi but not with Gauss-Seidel since x1, ..., xn has to be computed sequentially as each result depends on values from the previous x.

  • @151harshithsadasivuni5
    @151harshithsadasivuni5 3 года назад

    This is lit sir👌

  • @DippySticks
    @DippySticks 8 месяцев назад

    Thank you!

  • @estebannicolassebastianutr3322
    @estebannicolassebastianutr3322 10 лет назад

    Is the Gauss-Seidel method

  • @noahheyn6026
    @noahheyn6026 9 месяцев назад

    3rd Iteration x1 and x3 are wrong
    x1 should be 47/40
    x3 should be 269/160

  • @AmitKumar-zx9tk
    @AmitKumar-zx9tk 6 лет назад

    Thank you Sir

  • @mikeyt2008
    @mikeyt2008 5 лет назад

    Where did you get "The actual solution of the system of equation ...1,-3,2" ????

    • @evader110
      @evader110 5 лет назад +1

      They converge to those numbers. By doing more iterations, they approach that solution.

  • @farisrom2331
    @farisrom2331 4 года назад

    Do you study those in collage ?

  • @faroukg.asimegbe9597
    @faroukg.asimegbe9597 2 года назад

    8 years after...

  • @Cobbi_1610
    @Cobbi_1610 2 года назад

    Wow. I have a Math Method named after me, neat.

  • @morgansampi5336
    @morgansampi5336 9 лет назад

    do you have an email that i can ask you questions on?

  • @Dressupdaily
    @Dressupdaily 6 лет назад

    Yeh gauss Seidel method hai

  • @ghl19
    @ghl19 3 года назад

    i love you !!!!!!!

  • @akashsingh20031996
    @akashsingh20031996 8 лет назад

    thanx sir

  • @binhdangvn
    @binhdangvn 8 лет назад

    Is there any limit for Jacobi method? I use Jacobi method, but cannot solve this linear system. 2x - 6y + z = 11; -5x + y -2z = -12; x + 2y + 73z = 20.
    the Jacobi method answer is 0.7, -2.4, 0. However, the actually answer is 2, -1, 0

    • @adzeerulaslam
      @adzeerulaslam 5 лет назад

      @@inayatullah2739 diagonally dominant is for Gauss-Seidel Method

  • @moath4927
    @moath4927 3 года назад

    Thx 😊

  • @Sooha20
    @Sooha20 9 месяцев назад

    x1=1.175
    not 0.815

  • @HilalBouaoud
    @HilalBouaoud Год назад

    sahit 😀😀😀😀

  • @Richard-ck3jl
    @Richard-ck3jl 9 лет назад

    He sounds like Bill Nye.

  • @MJ-fz1mr
    @MJ-fz1mr Год назад

    Am l the only one getting 1.175 instead of 0.815?

  • @ShakeelAli-ne3dy
    @ShakeelAli-ne3dy 5 лет назад

    osm very easy

  • @AK47HELLBOY
    @AK47HELLBOY 5 лет назад

    IT DOESNT ADD UP!

  • @abdulrahmanradwan2046
    @abdulrahmanradwan2046 4 года назад

    Nice

  • @sand1saw
    @sand1saw 3 месяца назад

    My test is in an hour

  • @E_rich
    @E_rich 5 лет назад +1

    Steve Kerr, is that you?

    • @watermanOIT
      @watermanOIT  5 лет назад +1

      No, it's Greg Popovitch! :-)

  • @Cobbi399
    @Cobbi399 Год назад

    They made a method based on me

  • @aksh9422
    @aksh9422 3 года назад

    ❤️❤️❤️❤️

  • @cashoutcobi
    @cashoutcobi 8 лет назад

    my name is jacobi

  • @thetwogoats6851
    @thetwogoats6851 3 года назад

    not me in 2021

  • @makeouthill919
    @makeouthill919 6 лет назад

    My name is Jacobi wtf