Table 4 Comparison of the methods under consideration on the basis of absolute errors and CPU time for Kaps Problem 4 with different number of steps (n)

128

\(\mathrm{POBM} _{5}\)

5.214e–17

2.608e–19

7.487e–18

2.608e–19

9.962e–01

\(\mathrm{RPOBM} _{5}\)

5.214e–17

2.608e–19

7.487e–18

2.608e–19

7.935e–01

\(\mathrm{BHSM} _{5}\)

1.172e–17

9.559e–18

7.686e–18

9.554e–18

3.156e–01

\(\mathrm{Sahi} _{6}\)

9.182e–11

9.169e–14

9.3e–12

7.819e–15

8.553e–01

Radau I₅

3.280e–15

4.168e–17

4.938e–16

1.668e–17

4.917e–01

256

\(\mathrm{POBM} _{5}\)

8.034e–19

4.079e–21

1.137e–19

4.079e–21

2.691e+00

\(\mathrm{RPOBM} _{5}\)

8.034e–19

4.079e–21

1.137e–19

4.079e–21

2.029e+00

\(\mathrm{BHSM} _{5}\)

1.791e–19

1.494e–19

1.189e–19

1.493e–19

7.806e–01

\(\mathrm{Sahi} _{6}\)

3.111e–12

3.107e–15

4.179e–13

3.707e–16

1.977e+00

Radau I₅

5.214e–17

6.584e–19

7.487e–18

2.608e–19

1.014e+00

512

\(\mathrm{POBM} _{5}\)

1.236e–20

6.376e–23

1.748e–21

6.376e–23

4.106e+00

\(\mathrm{RPOBM} _{5}\)

1.236e–20

6.376e–23

1.748e–21

6.376e–23

3.685+00

\(\mathrm{BHSM} _{5}\)

2.727e–21

2.334e–21

1.835e–21

2.333e–21

1.348e+00

\(\mathrm{Sahi} _{6}\)

9.454e–14

9.442e–17

1.298e–14

1.150e–17

4.011e+00

Radau I₅

8.034e–19

1.028e–20

1.137e–19

4.079e–21

2.772e+00