Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I read that the local truncation error of a method of order $p$ is $O(h^{p+1})$ (thus, one order higher). Yet, the global truncation error is in general $O(h^p)$ for a stable method (thus, one order lower than the local error). But why?

If the global truncation error is the accumulation of local truncation error at all steps $h$, shouldn't it be still order $p+1$?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

For a fixed interval of integration, the number of steps is $O(h^{-1})$. The global error is the local error times the number of steps. So if $e_i$ is the error at step $i$, and $E$ is the global error, and we're integrating over an interval of length $L$, informally we have:

$$ e_i = O(h^{p+1}) \Leftrightarrow |e_i| \le Ch^{p+1} $$

$$ |E| = \left| \sum_{i=1}^{\lfloor L/h \rfloor}e_i \right| \le \sum_{i=1}^{\lfloor L/h \rfloor}Ch^{p+1} \le CLh^p \Leftrightarrow E = O(h^p) $$

share|cite|improve this answer
I edited the number of steps (which was $O(h^{−1})$ before) and accepted the answer. If my edit is correct, I believe it is appropriate to accept this answer – Sosi Jun 4 '13 at 11:33

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.