Enhanced Numerical Techniques for Selective Integration Using Error Correction Methods
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30526/39.2.4304Keywords:
Composite rules , Enhanced numerical , Error correctionAbstract
Classical numerical integration methods, such as Simpson’s rule and Gaussian quadrature, perform well for smooth functions but lose accuracy near discontinuities. This paper introduces a Selective Error-Correcting Adaptive Quadrature algorithm (SECAQ), a method designed to address this issue. SECAQ identifies intervals with large local error or sharp changes, estimates jump sizes using one-sided evaluations, and applies compact correction terms activated only near the discontinuity. These localized corrections restore smoothness within each subinterval and can enable the base quadrature rule to achieve its full theoretical accuracy. Numerical tests involving jumps, cusps, and oscillatory functions demonstrate that SECAQ restores fourth-order convergence for Simpson’s rule and achieves errors close to machine precision. Compared to the standard adaptive Simpson’s method, SECAQ reduces the number of function evaluations by up to 60% while maintaining low computational overhead. The method is particularly useful when discontinuity locations or jump sizes are known or can be reliably estimated
References
1. Mahata S, Rathan S, Ruiz-Álvarez J, Yáñez DF. A general correction for numerical integration rules over piece-wise continuous functions. J Comput Appl Math. 2025; 459:116378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2024.116378.
2. Ryaben'kii VS, Tsynkov SV. A theoretical introduction to numerical analysis. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2019.
3. Ray N, Wang D, Jiao X, Glimm J. High-order numerical integration over discrete surfaces. SIAM J Numer Anal. 2012;50(6):3061–3083. https://doi.org/10.1137/110857404
4. Djukić DL, Mutavdžić D, Reichel L, Spalević MM. Generalized averaged gauss quadrature rules: a survey. Mathematics. 2025; 13(19):3145. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13193145
5. Trefethen LN. Is Gauss quadrature better than Clenshaw–Curtis? SIAM Rev. 2008;50(1):67–87. https://doi.org/10.1137/060659831
6. Cook G. Numerical analysis: an introduction. 1st ed. Willford Press; 2019.
7. Hazaymeh A, Saadeh R, Hatamleh R, Alomari MW, Qazza A. A Perturbed Milne’s Quadrature Rule for n-Times differentiable functions with Lp-Error estimates. Axioms. 2023; 12(9):803. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms12090803.
8. Sauer T. Numerical analysis. Norderstedt (Germany): BoD–Books on Demand; 2025.
9. Dahlquist G, Bjorck A. Numerical Methods in Scientific Computing: Vol 1. Philadelphia (PA): SIAM; 2008. p. 717.
10. Hatisaru V. Mathematical connections established in the teaching of functions. Teach Math Appl. 2023, 42(3): 207-227.
11. Leader J. Numerical analysis and scientific computation. Boca Raton (FL): Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2022.
12. Ali T, Xiao Z, Jiang H, Li B. A class of digital integrators based on trigonometric quadrature rules. IEEE Trans Ind Electron. 2023, 71(6): 6128-6138.
13. Waldvogel J. Fast construction of the Fejér and Clenshaw–Curtis quadrature rules. BIT Numer Math. 2006;46:195-202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10543-006-0045-4
14. Shi L, Ullah MZ, Nashine HK, Alansari M, Shateyi S. An enhanced numerical iterative method for expanding the attraction basins when computing matrix signs of invertible matrices. Fractal Fract. 2023;7(9):684. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract7090684
15. Legrain G. Non-negative moment fitting quadrature rules for fictitious domain methods. Comput Math Appl. 2021, 99: 270-291.
16. Saha A, Santosh C. A Comprehensive review of numerical integration techniques and error analysis. Int J Appl Sci Eng. 2024;12(1):107-124.
17. Fedoseev P, Pesterev D, Karimov A, Butusov D. New step size control algorithm for semi-implicit composition ODE solvers. Algorithms, 2022, 15(8): 275. https://doi.org/10.3390/a15080275.
18. Ahmed SK, Mohammed TZ. Techniques for reducing numerical error in the calculation of numerical integration: a comparative study. Afr J Adv Pure Appl Sci. 2025;4(2):68-77.
19. Epperson JF. An introduction to numerical methods and analysis. 2nd ed. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley; 2013.
20. Davis PJ, Rabinowitz P. Methods of numerical integration. Mineola (NY): Courier Corp; 2007.
21. Gupta G, Xiao X, Bogdan P. Multiwavelet-based operator learning for differential equations. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. 2021;34:24048–24062.
22. Gander W, Gautschi W. Adaptive quadrature—revisited. BIT Numer Math. 2000;40:84-101. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022318402393.
23. Chan JCC, Kroese DP. Statistical modeling and computation. Cham (Switzerland): Springer; 2025.
24. Neher M. Numerische mathematik: eine anschauliche modulare Einführung. 1st ed. Berlin: Springer Spektrum; 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-68815-1.
25. Trefethen LN. Exactness of quadrature formulas. SIAM Rev. 2022;64(1):132-150. https://doi.org/10.1137/20M1389522.
26. Masud M, Shimi F, Gope R. Numerical integration techniques: a comprehensive review. Int J Innov Sci Res Technol (IJISRT). 2024;9(4):2744–2755. https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24SEP1327.
27. Batenkov D. Complete algebraic reconstruction of piecewise-smooth functions from Fourier data. Math Comput. 2015;84(295):2329–2350.
28. Amat S, Li Z, Álvarez J, Solano C, Trillo JC. Numerical integration rules with improved accuracy close to discontinuities. Math Comput Simul. 2023;210:593-614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2023.03.032.
29. Sun T. Necessity of numerical smoothness. arXiv [Preprint]. 2012. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1207.3026.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ibn AL-Haitham Journal For Pure and Applied Sciences

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
licenseTerms





