Branch point — where it appears
Named by 4 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
An error committed before the arithmetic
Before a nonlinear eigenvalue problem is solved, somebody says where they think the eigenvalues are. That sentence sets the accuracy of everything that follows by five orders, costs nothing to say, and cannot be revised once the approximation built on it is in hand.
Two approximants and one matrix size
A polynomial approximant linearises to nd rows and a rational one to n(m+1), so the fair contest fixes the matrix and varies the basis. On an easy target set the two are indistinguishable and the ordering flips with the noise; on one that reaches a branch point the rational pulls away by two orders.
The eigenvalues that are answers to nothing
A rational approximant of degree five turns a six-by-six problem into a thirty-six-by-thirty-six one, and thirty-six numbers come back. Six are the answer. The rest are exact eigenvalues of the approximant, lying where the function it approximates is not a real number at all.
The points the algorithm chose
A rational approximant whose support points are picked by its own residual clusters geometrically at a branch point nobody named — recovering by measurement the rule a hand-built approximant is given. At degree ten it is seven hundred and fifty times more accurate than the same form with its points spread evenly.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Approximation before linearisationRational approximationCondition numberLinearisationNonlinear eigenvalue problemSpurious spectrumTarget setAdaptive interpolationBarycentric formChebyshev basisCompanion formComrade matrix