% -*- mode: noweb; noweb-default-code-mode: R-mode; -*-
\documentclass[nojss]{jss}

\usepackage{dsfont}
\usepackage{bbm}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{calc,decorations.markings}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% declarations for jss.cls %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%


%% just as usual
\author{Robin K. S. Hankin}
\title{The residue theorem from a numerical perspective}
%\VignetteIndexEntry{The residue theorem from a numerical perspective}
%% for pretty printing and a nice hypersummary also set:
%% \Plainauthor{Achim Zeileis, Second Author} %% comma-separated
\Plaintitle{The residue theorem from a numerical perspective}


%% for pretty printing and a nice hypersummary also set:
\Plainauthor{Robin K. S. Hankin}

%% an abstract and keywords

\Abstract{Here I use the {\tt myintegrate()} function of the
\pkg{elliptic} package to illustrate three classical theorems from
analysis: Cauchy's integral theorem, the residue theorem, and Cauchy's
integral formula.}

\Keywords{Residue theorem, Cauchy formula, Cauchy's integral formula,
  contour integration, complex integration, Cauchy's theorem}


\Keywords{Elliptic functions, residue theorem, numerical integration, \proglang{R}}
\Plainkeywords{Elliptic functions, residue theorem, numerical integration, R}

%% publication information
%% NOTE: This needs to filled out ONLY IF THE PAPER WAS ACCEPTED.
%% If it was not (yet) accepted, leave them commented.
% \Volume{VOL}
% \Issue{ISS}
% \Month{MONTH}
% \Year{YEAR}
% \Submitdate{yyyy-mm-dd}
% \Acceptdate{yyyy-mm-dd}
% \Repository{https://doi.org/10.9999/nonexistent-article}

%% The address of (at least) one author should be given
%% in the following format:
\Address{
  Robin K. S. Hankin\\%\orcid{https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5982-0415}\\
  University of Stirling\\
  Scotland\\
  E-mail: \email{hankin.robin@gmail.com}
}


%% It is also possible to add a telephone and fax number
%% before the e-mail in the following format:
%% Telephone: +43/1/31336-5053
%% Fax: +43/1/31336-734

%% for those who use Sweave please include the following line (with % symbols):
%% need no \usepackage{Sweave.sty}

%% end of declarations %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\begin{document}

<<requirepackage,echo=FALSE,print=FALSE>>=
require(elliptic,quietly=TRUE)
@ 

\setlength{\intextsep}{0pt}
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.2\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1in]{\Sexpr{system.file("help/figures/elliptic.png",package="elliptic")}}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}

\section{Introduction}

Cauchy's integral theorem and its corollaries are some of the most
startling and fruitful ideas in the whole of mathematics.  They place
powerful constraints on analytical functions; and show that a
function's local behaviour dictates its global properties.
Cauchy's integral theorem may be used to prove the residue theorem and
Cauchy's integral formula; these three theorems form a powerful and
cohesive suite of results.

In this short document I use numerical methods to illustrate and
highlight some of their consequences for complex analysis.

\subsection{Cauchy's integral theorem}.

Augustin-Louis Cauchy proved an early version of the integral theorem
in 1814; it required that the function's derivative was continuous.
This assumption was removed in 1900 by \'Edouard Goursat at the
expense of a more difficult proof; the result is sometimes known as
the Cauchy-Goursat theorem and is now a cornerstone of complex analysis.
Formally, in modern notation, we have:

\noindent {\bf Cauchy's integral theorem}.  If $f(z)$ is holomorphic
in a simply connected domain $\Omega\subset\mathbb{C}$, then for any
closed contour $C$ in $\Omega$,

$$\int_{C}f(z)\,dz=0.$$
\\

To demonstrate this theorem numerically, I will use the integration
suite of functions provided with the \pkg{elliptic} package which
perform complex integration of a function along a path specified
either as a sequence of segments [{\tt integrate.segments()}] or a
curve [{\tt integrate.contour()}].  

Let us consider $f(z)=\exp z$, holomorphic over all of $\mathbb{C}$,
and evaluate

$$\oint_C f(z)\,dz$$

where $C$ is the square $0\longrightarrow 1\longrightarrow
1+i\longrightarrow i\longrightarrow 0$ (figure~\ref{square}).  Numerically:

\begin{figure}\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
% Axes
\draw [help lines,->] (-1,  0) -- (2, 0);
\draw [help lines,->] ( 0, -1) -- (0, 2);
% Red path

\begin{scope}[very thick,decoration={
    markings,
    mark=at position 0.5 with {\arrow{>}}}
    ] 
    \draw[red,postaction={decorate}] (0,0)--(1,0) node[black, midway, below]{\tiny A};
    \draw[red,postaction={decorate}] (1,0)--(1,1) node[black, midway, right]{\tiny B};
    \draw[red,postaction={decorate}] (1,1)--(0,1) node[black, midway, above]{\tiny C};
    \draw[red,postaction={decorate}] (0,1)--(0,0) node[black, midway,  left]{\tiny D};
\end{scope}
% The labels
\node at ( 1.70, -0.2){$x$ };
\node at (-0.24,  1.7){$iy$};

\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A square contour integral \label{square} on the complex plane}
\end{figure}

<<>>=
integrate.segments(exp, c(0, 1, 1+1i, 1i), close=TRUE)
@ 

Above we see that the result is zero (to within numerical precision),
in agreement with the integral theorem.  It is interesting to consider
each leg separately.  We have

$$
A=e-1\qquad B=e(e^i-1)\qquad C=-e^i(e-1)\qquad D=-(e^i-1)
$$

And taking B as an example:

<<>>=
analytic <- exp(1)*(exp(1i)-1)
numeric  <- integrate.segments(exp, c(1, 1+1i), close=FALSE)
c(analytic=analytic, numeric=numeric, difference=analytic-numeric)
@ 

showing agreement to within numerical precision.

\subsection{The residue theorem}

{\bf residue theorem}.  Given $U$, a simply connected open subset of
$\mathbb{C}$, and a finite list of points $a_1,\ldots,a_n$.
Suppose $f(z)$ is holomorphic on $U_0=U\setminus\left\lbrace
a_1,\ldots a_n\right\rbrace$ and $\gamma$ is a closed rectifiable
curve in $U_0$.  Then

$$\oint_\gamma f(z)\,dz = 2\pi i\sum_{k=1}^n
\operatorname{I}(\gamma,a_k)\cdot\operatorname{Res}(f,a_k)$$

where $\operatorname{I}(\gamma,a_k)$ is the winding number of $\gamma$
about $a_k$ and $\operatorname{Res}(f,a_k)$ is the residue of $f$ at
$a_k$.  \\

The canonical, and simplest, application of this is to derive the log
function by integrating $f(z)=1/z$ along the unit circle, as per
figure \ref{circular}.  Here the residue at the origin is 1, so the
integral round the unit circle is, analytically, $2\pi i$.
Numerically:

<<>>=
u     <- function(x){exp(pi*2i*x)}
udash <- function(x){pi*2i * exp(pi*2i*x)}

analytic <- pi*2i
numeric  <- integrate.contour(function(z){1/z}, u, udash)
c(analytic=analytic, numeric=numeric, difference=analytic-numeric)
@ 



\begin{figure}\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
% Axes
\draw [help lines,->] (-2,  0) -- (2, 0);
\draw [help lines,->] ( 0, -2) -- (0, 2);

% Red path

\draw [
  decoration = {markings, mark = at position 0 with {\arrow{>}}},
  postaction = {decorate},
  very thick, red] (0,0) circle (1cm);

% The labels
\node at ( 1.70, -0.2){$x$ };
\node at (-0.24,  1.7){$iy$};

\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A circular contour integral \label{circular} on the complex plane}
\end{figure}


again we see very close agreement.

\subsection{Cauchy's integral formula}

{\bf Cauchy's integral formula}.  If $f(z)$ is analytic within and on
a simple closed curve $C$ (assumed to be oriented anticlockwise)
inside a simply-connected domain, and if $z_0$ is any point inside
$C$, then

$$f(z_0)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_C\frac{f(z)\,dz}{z-z_0}.$$


We may use this to evaluate the Gauss hypergeometric function at a
critical point.  The Gauss hypergeometric function ${}_2F_1(a,b;c;z)$
is defined as

$$1+\frac{ab}{c}\frac{z}{1!} + \frac{a(a+1)b(b+1)}{c(c+1)}\frac{z^2}{2!}+\cdots$$

Now, this series has a radius of convergence of
1~\citep{abramowitz1965}; but the function is defined over the whole
complex plane by analytic continuation~\citep{buhring1987}.  The
\pkg{hypergeo} package~\citep{hankin2015} evaluates ${}_2F_1(a,b;c;z)$
for different values of $z$ by applying a sequence of transformations
to reduce $\left|z\right|$ to its minimum value; however, this process
is ineffective for $z=\frac{1}{2}\pm i\sqrt{3}/2$, these points
transforming to themselves.  Numerically:

<<showhypergeofail>>=
library("hypergeo")
z0 <- 1/2 + sqrt(3)/2i
f <- function(z){hypergeo_powerseries(1/2, 1/3, 1/5, z)}
f(z0)
@

Above we see {\tt NA}, signifying failure to converge.  However, the
residue theorem may be used to evaluate ${}_2F_1$ at this point:

<<>>=
r <- 0.1 # radius of contour
u <- function(x){z0 + r*exp(pi * 2i * x)}
udash <- function(x){r * pi * (0+2i) * exp(pi * 2i * x)}
(val_residue <- integrate.contour(function(z){f(z) / (z-z0)}, u, udash) / (pi*2i))
@ 

We can compare this value with that obtained by a more sophisticated
[and computationally expensive] method, that of
Gosper~\citep{hankin2015}:

<<>>=
(val_gosper <- hypergeo_gosper(1/2, 1/3, 1/5, z0))
abs(val_gosper - val_residue)
@ 

Above we see reasonable numerical agreement.


\section{Conclusions}

\bibliography{elliptic}
\end{document}