Connect with us

Can we predict Simulation?

Discussion in 'CAD' started by Dilips, Nov 23, 2006.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Dilips

    Dilips Guest


    This question may seem strange to you, but it is of very huge
    significance for me.
    Can we predict, if a circuit will simulate or not looking at the matrix
    The AX=B which the iterative or direct solvers in SPICE use, I want to
    know if given A and B. Is there some mathematical operation that can be
    performed to know that
    a) a solution will exist?
    b) if a solution exists, will it converge to the correct answer?
    c) will it converge to an answer at all?

    These questions mean a lot to my thesis work and I shall be really
    really thankful if someone can answer this

    Thank you,
  2. hrh1818

    hrh1818 Guest

    Numerical Methods in Engineering with Python by Jaan Kiusalaas provides
    the following information.

    On page 28 the book says "A system on n linear equations in n unknowns
    has a unique solution, provided the determinant of the coefficient
    matrix is nonsingular; that is |A| is not equal to 0.".

    Page 85 in the book provides the following guidance when using
    iterative methods to solve a system of linear equations. "A serious
    drawback of iterative methods is that they do not always converge to
    the solution. It can be shown that convergence is guaranteed only if
    the coefficient matrix is diagonally dominant. The initial guess for X
    plays no role in determining whether convergence takes place--if the
    procedure converges for one starting vector, it would do so for any
    starting vector. The initial guess affects only the number of
    iterations that are required for convergence."

    Page 158 and 159 in the book provides the following guidance when using
    the Newton-Raphson method to solve n simultaneous nonlinear equations,
    "The simplest and the most effective method of computing X is the
    Newton-Raphson method. It works well with simultaneous equations,
    provided that it is supplied a good starting point. There are other
    methods that have better global convergence characteristics, but all of
    them are variants of the Newton-Raphson method. As in the one
    dimensional case, suceess of the Newton-Raphson method procedure
    depends entirely on the initial estimate of X. If a good starting
    point is used, convergence to the solution is very rapid. Otherwise,
    the results are unpredictable."

    Hence, I conclude the answer is yes if you have a system of linear
    equations but the answer is no if you have a system of nonlinear

    You also might want to post your questions in the Sci-math.num.analysis
    group to see what the numerical method pros there say.

  3. Dilips

    Dilips Guest

    Hello Howard,

    Thanks for your answer. That was a very useful excerpt from the book. I
    understand that it helps with linear equations but is not the case with
    non-linear equations.
    Another question now would be, how good is it if that knowledge is
    known for linear equations alone.

    Thanks for your answer.
    Dilip Seshadri
  4. hrh1818

    hrh1818 Guest

    The book covers a lot more than linear equations. The book covers all
    of the topics that are typically covered in a first course in numerical
    methods. Topics, like Systems of Linear Algebraic Equations,
    Interpolation and Curve Fitting, Roots of Equations, Numerical
    Differention, Numerical Integration, Ordinary Diffrential Equations,
    Two Point Boundary Value Problems, Symmetric Matrix Eigenvalue
    Problems, and an Introduction to Optimization.
    I am not sure what you mean by "knowledge known for linear equations
    alone". However, as any circuit that contains a semiconductor will be
    modeled by a system of nonlinear equations and as provided by the
    guidance given on pages 158 and 159 by Jaan Kiusalaas in his book if
    you make a bad initial guess for the approximate solution to your
    system of nonlinear equations you won't be able to tell ahead of time
    if your numerical method will converge on a solution.

  5. Joel Kolstad

    Joel Kolstad Guest


    Interesting... he has the same book for Matlab as well! Do you happen to have
    access to both and, if so, could you provide a comparison? I've done some
    "objected oriented" programming in Matlab and, while I'm actually rather
    impressed with how object oriented Matlab can be given what roots it began
    with, clearly Python is a much more sophisticated general purpose programming
    language... but I figured that in Python you'd immediately miss out on many of
    the powerful built-in function in Matlab, such as the graphing tools and of
    course all the toolkits.

  6. Hal Murray

    Hal Murray Guest

    Interesting... he has the same book for Matlab as well! Do you happen to have
    There is a python wrapper for gnuplot

    PyMat - An interface between Python and MATLAB

    There is NumPy
    The fundamental package needed for scientific computing with Python is called NumPy

    Octaviz might be interesting:
  7. hrh1818

    hrh1818 Guest


    I don't have access to the Matlab version of Jaan Kiusalaas Numerical
    Methods book. However, I made a quick comparison at Both
    books cost $85, both books have approximately the same number of pages,
    exactly the same topics are listed in the table of contents, and a
    quick check of the index indicates both books cover the same topics.
    Hence I strongly suspect the only differece between the two books is
    one book uses Matlab m files and the other uses Python script filles.

    Jaan kiusalass does not make use of the object oriented features of
    Python. Instead each script file is a procedure. At one level
    Python can be an easy programmng language to learn. But it also can
    appear to be mysterious as it can compress a lot of action into very
    few lines of code.

    Certainly if you are looking for tools or books to help you solve
    problems in an unusual engineerig or science field than Matlab beats
    Python. But for general numerical analysis the performance of Python
    and numpy compare quite favorably with Matlab. And of couse the
    diehards who post on the Python NewsGroup will tell you Python and
    numpy are free.


    Joel Kolstad wr
  8. Joel Kolstad

    Joel Kolstad Guest

    Thanks for the response Howard. If I get a copy, I think I might head the
    Python route... it seems potentially easier to go from Python->Matlab than the
    other way around.

    Python streeses trying to make code more explicit by, e.g., removing a lot of
    the "magic" that C++ has (such as a very fancy scheme for automatic type
    conversions), yet they still have plenty of magic of their own, such as "for"
    searching for an iterator method for the object in question and then
    defaulting to indexing methods if one isn't found; it's an interesting

Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day