Algorithms for accurate, validated and fast polynomial evaluation



We survey a class of algorithms to evaluate polynomials with floating point coefficients and for computation performed with IEEE-754 floating point arithmetic. The principle is to apply, once or recursively, an error-free transformation of the polynomial evaluation with the Horner algorithm and to accurately sum the final decomposition. These compensated algorithms are as accurate as the Horner algorithm perforned inK times the working precision, forK an arbitrary positive integer. We prove this accuracy property with an a priori error analysis. We also provide validated dynamic bounds and apply these results to compute a faithfully rounded evaluation. These compensated algorithms are fast. We illustrate their practical efficiency with numerical experiments on significant environments. Comparing to existing alternatives theseK-times compensated algorithms are competitive forK up to 4, i.e., up to 212 mantissa bits.

Key words

polynomial evaluation compensated algorithm floating-point arithmetic IEEE-754 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    High-Precision Software Directory. Scholar
  2. [2]
    T.J. Dekker, A floating-point technique for extending the available precision. Numer. Math.,18 (1971), 224–242.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    J.W. Demmel, Applied Numerical Linear Algebra. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA, 1997.MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    S. Graillat, P. Langlois and N. Louvet, Compensated Horner scheme. Algebraic and Numerical Algorithms and Computer-Assisted Proofs, B. Buchberger, S. Oishi, M. Plum and S.M. Rump (eds.), Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, No. 05391, Internationales Begenungs-und Forschungszentrum (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany, 2006.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    S. Graillat, P. Langlois and N. Louvet, Improving the compensated Horner scheme with a fused multiply and add. Proceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, Vol. 2, Association for Computing Machinery, 2006, 1323–1327.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Y. Hida, X.S. Li and D.H. Bailey, Quad-double arithmetic: Algorithms, implementation, and application. 15th IEEE Symposium on Computer Arithmetic, N. Burgess and L. Ciminiera (eds.), IEEE Computer Society, 2001, 155–162.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    N.J. Higham, Accuracy and Stability of Numerical Algorithms, 2nd edition. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2002.MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    C.M. Hoffmann, G. Park, J.-R. Simard and N.F. Stewart, Residual iteration, and accurate polynomial evaluation for shape-interrogation applications. Proceedings of the 9th ACM Symposium on Solid Modeling and Applications, 2004, 9–14.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    IEEE Standards Committee 754, IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic, ANSI/IEEE Standard 754–1985. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 1985, Reprinted in SIGPLAN Notices,22 (1987), 9–25.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    D.E. Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming: Seminumerical Algorithms, Vol. 2, 3rd edition. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, USA, 1998.MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    P. Langlois, More accuracy at fixed precision. J. Comp. Appl. Math.,162 (2004), 57–77.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    P. Langlois and N. Louvet, How to ensure a faithful polynomial evaluation with the compensated Horner algorithm. 18th IEEE International Symposium on Computer Arithmetic, P. Kornerup and J.-M. Muller (eds.), IEEE Computer Society, 2007, 141–149.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    P. Langlois and N. Louvet, More instruction level parallelism explains the actual efficiency of compensated algorithms. Technical Report hal-00165020, DALI Research Project, HALCCSD 2007.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    P. Langlois and N. Louvet, Compensated Horner algorithm inK times the working precision. RNC-8, Real Numbers and Computer Conference, J. Brugera and M. Daumas (eds.), Santiago de Compostela, Spain, 2008.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    X.S. Li, J.W. Demmel, D.H. Bailey, G. Henry, Y. Hida, J. Iskandar, W. Kahan, S.Y. Kang, A. Kapur, M.C. Martin, B.J. Thompson, T. Tung and D.J. Yoo, Design, implementation and testing of extended and mixed precision BLAS. ACM Trans. Math. Software,28 (2002), 152–205.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    The MPFR Library (version 2.2.1). Available at Scholar
  17. [17]
    Y. Nievergelt, Scalar fused multiply-add instructions produce floating-point matrix arithmetic provably accurate to the penultimate digit. ACM Trans. Math. Software,29 (2003), 27–48.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    T. Ogita, S.M. Rump and S. Oishi, Accurate sum and dot product. SIAM J. Sci. Comput.,26 (2005), 1955–1988.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    S.M. Rump, T. Ogita and S. Oishi, Accurate floating-point summation, Part I: Faithful rounding. SIAM J. Sci. Comput.,31 (2008), 189–224.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© JJIAM Publishing Committee 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stef Graillat
    • 1
  • Philippe Langlois
    • 2
  • Nicolas Louvet
    • 3
  1. 1.PEQUAN, LIP6Université Pierre et Marie Curie, CNRSParisFrance
  2. 2.DALI ELIAUSUniversité de Perpignan Via DomitiaFrance
  3. 3.Arénaire, LIP, INRIAUniversité de Lyon, CNRSFrance

Personalised recommendations