teaching/scientificComputing
Archived
3
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity

[programming/exercises] minors and add example data file for exercise 4

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Jan Grewe 2019-10-25 14:06:29 +02:00
parent 571de4b7f5
commit 18e35e942b
2 changed files with 10 additions and 5 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
programming/exercises/matrices.tex
View File

@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ following pattern:
\code{x(randi(100, 50, 1)])} \code{x(randi(100, 50, 1)])}
\end{solution} \end{solution}
\part Can you imagine an advantage of using linear indexing instead of subscript indexing? \part Can you imagine an advantage of using linear instead of subscript indexing?
\begin{solution} \begin{solution}
Die Matrize ist 2-dimensional. Wenn mit dem subscript index Die Matrize ist 2-dimensional. Wenn mit dem subscript index
zugegriffen werden soll, dann muss auf die Dimensionen zugegriffen werden soll, dann muss auf die Dimensionen
@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ following pattern:
\question Create a 3-D matrix from two 2-D matrices. Use the \question Create a 3-D matrix from two 2-D matrices. Use the
function \code{cat} (check the help to learn its usage). function \code{cat} (check the help to learn its usage).
\begin{parts} \begin{parts}
\part Select all elements of the first ``page'' (index 1, 3. dimension). \part Select all elements of the first ``page'' (index 1 in the 3. dimension).
\begin{solution} \begin{solution}
\code{x = randn(5,5); \\y = randn(5, 5);\\ z = cat(3, x, y);\\disp(z(:,:,1))} \code{x = randn(5,5); \\y = randn(5, 5);\\ z = cat(3, x, y);\\disp(z(:,:,1))}
\end{solution} \end{solution}

11
programming/exercises/variables_types.tex
View File

@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
\documentclass[12pt,a4paper,pdftex]{exam} \documentclass[12pt,a4paper,pdftex]{exam}
\usepackage[german]{babel} \usepackage[english]{babel}
\usepackage{natbib} \usepackage{natbib}
\usepackage{graphicx} \usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[small]{caption} \usepackage[small]{caption}
@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ following pattern: ``variables\_datatypes\_\{lastname\}.m''
\question Floating point numbers I: Limited precision during additions \question Floating point numbers I: Limited precision during additions
\begin{parts} \begin{parts}
\part Create the variable \code{a} and assign an arbitrary floting point number. \part Create the variable \code{a} and assign an arbitrary floating point number.
\begin{solution} \begin{solution}
\code{a = 3.14;} \code{a = 3.14;}
\end{solution} \end{solution}
@ -185,12 +185,17 @@ following pattern: ``variables\_datatypes\_\{lastname\}.m''
Result is 0! Even with doubles there is a limited precision in Result is 0! Even with doubles there is a limited precision in
the decimal part. the decimal part.
\end{solution} \end{solution}
\part Calculate \verb=(2^52 + 1) - 2^52= and \part Calculate \verb=(2^52 + 1) - 2^52=,
\verb=(2^53 + 1) - 2^53=. \verb=(2^53 + 1) - 2^53=.
\begin{solution} \begin{solution}
First command results in = 1, in the second case = 0. With such First command results in = 1, in the second case = 0. With such
high numbers, small differences (1!) cannot be resolved. high numbers, small differences (1!) cannot be resolved.
\end{solution} \end{solution}
\part Same as before, but add larger numbers (100 and 101, for example).
\begin{solution}
The difference between 100 and 101 cannot be resolved, so it is
the delta, not the absolute value that is important.
\end{solution}
\part Calculate \code{sqrt(1+1e-16)-1}. Is the result correct? Why (not)? \part Calculate \code{sqrt(1+1e-16)-1}. Is the result correct? Why (not)?
\begin{solution} \begin{solution}
Square root of something larger than 1 should not be 1 and thus Square root of something larger than 1 should not be 1 and thus