# \#accuracy

**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/tag/accuracy/1859.md

[Latest](https://discourse.julialang.org/latest.md) · [Categories](https://discourse.julialang.org/categories.md) · [Tags](https://discourse.julialang.org/tags.md)

---

## [Fuzzy Logic for Verifying Numerical Order of a Method](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/fuzzy-logic-for-verifying-numerical-order-of-a-method/137385)

<div class="topic-metadata">

**Author:** [@leespen1](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/leespen1)\
**Replies:** 6\
**Last updated:** [June 3, 2026, 12:53am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/fuzzy-logic-for-verifying-numerical-order-of-a-method/137385 "2026-06-03T00:53:08Z")

</div>

I often program numerical methods for solving initial value problems, and would like to test their order of convergence. However, I find that it is difficult to have automated convergence tests, due to the pre-asymptotic…

---

## [Floating-point accuracy visualization example: the ULP error for each math function coming with Julia](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/floating-point-accuracy-visualization-example-the-ulp-error-for-each-math-function-coming-with-julia/135392)

<div class="topic-metadata">

**Author:** [@nsajko](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/nsajko)\
**Replies:** 20\
**Last updated:** [February 6, 2026, 2:25pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/floating-point-accuracy-visualization-example-the-ulp-error-for-each-math-function-coming-with-julia/135392 "2026-02-06T14:25:29Z")

</div>

Introduction The implementation of a math function, such as cos(::Float64) in Julia, should be fast, but also needs to be at least somewhat accurate. Here I propose a method for visualizing empirical accuracy data. Cons…

---

## [Paper on the accuracy of math functions](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/paper-on-the-accuracy-of-math-functions/132227)

<div class="topic-metadata">

**Author:** [@JeffreySarnoff](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/JeffreySarnoff)\
**Replies:** 1\
**Last updated:** [February 1, 2026, 9:04pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/paper-on-the-accuracy-of-math-functions/132227 "2026-02-01T21:04:20Z")

</div>

Mantas Mikaitis and Tejaswa Rizyal have this well developed, reliable paper The software is available on github:

---

## [Numerical sensitivity of eigvecs for \`≈\` identical (unitful) matrices?](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/numerical-sensitivity-of-eigvecs-for-identical-unitful-matrices/134846)

<div class="topic-metadata">

**Author:** [@bremez](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/bremez)\
**Replies:** 3\
**Last updated:** [January 3, 2026, 2:11am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/numerical-sensitivity-of-eigvecs-for-identical-unitful-matrices/134846 "2026-01-03T02:11:09Z")

</div>

I came across the following discrepancy, see MWE: using LinearAlgebra, Unitful GHz = 1u"GHz"; wq = 6.7565\*GHz; wc = 20\*GHz; g = 0.1847\*GHz; Ns = 10; op = diagm(1 =\> sqrt.(1:Ns)); b = kron(op, I(Ns+1)); a = kron(I(Ns+1),…