Runge–Kutta methods
family of implicit and explicit iterative methods

In numerical analysis, the Runge–Kutta methods (English: RUUNG-ə-KUUT-tah) are a family of explicit and implicit iterative methods, which include the Euler method, used in discretization for the approximate solutions of differential equations. These methods were developed around 1900 by the German mathematicians Carl Runge and Wilhelm Kutta.
The fourth-order Runge–Kutta method
The most widely known member of the Runge–Kutta family is generally referred to as "RK4", the "classic Runge–Kutta method" or simply as "the Runge–Kutta method".
Let an initial value problem be specified as follows:
d
y
d
t
=
f
(
t
,
y
)
,
y
(
t
0
)
=
y
0
.
{\displaystyle {\frac {dy}{dt}}=f(t,y),\quad y(t_{0})=y_{0}.}
Here
y
{\displaystyle y}
is an unknown function (scalar or vector) of time
t
{\displaystyle t}
, which we would like to approximate; we are told that
d
y
d
t
{\displaystyle {\frac {dy}{dt}}}
, the rate at which
y
{\displaystyle y}
changes, is a function of
t
{\displaystyle t}
and of
y
{\displaystyle y}
itself. At the initial time
t
0
{\displaystyle t_{0}}
the corresponding
y
{\displaystyle y}
value is
y
0
{\displaystyle y_{0}}
. The function
f
{\displaystyle f}
and the initial conditions
t
0
{\displaystyle t_{0}}
,
y
0
{\displaystyle y_{0}}
are given.
Now we pick a step-size h > 0 and define:
y
n
+
1
=
y
n
+
h
6
(
k
1
+
2
k
2
+
2
k
3
+
k
4
)
,
t
n
+
1
=
t
n
+
h
{\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}y_{n+1}&=y_{n}+{\frac {h}{6}}\left(k_{1}+2k_{2}+2k_{3}+k_{4}\right),\\t_{n+1}&=t_{n}+h\\\end{aligned}}}
for n = 0, 1, 2, 3, ..., using
k
1
=
f
(
t
n
,
y
n
)
,
k
2
=
f
(
t
n
+
h
2
,
y
n
+
k
1
h
2
)
,
k
3
=
f
(
t
n
+
h
2
,
y
n
+
k
2
h
2
)
,
k
4
=
f
(
t
n
+
h
,
y
n
+
h
k
3
)
.
{\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}k_{1}&=\ f(t_{n},y_{n}),\\k_{2}&=\ f\!\left(t_{n}+{\frac {h}{2}},y_{n}+k_{1}{\frac {h}{2}}\right),\\k_{3}&=\ f\!\left(t_{n}+{\frac {h}{2}},y_{n}+k_{2}{\frac {h}{2}}\right),\\k_{4}&=\ f\!\left(t_{n}+h,y_{n}+hk_{3}\right).\end{aligned}}}
(Note: the above equations have different but equivalent definitions in different texts.)
Here
y
n
+
1
{\displaystyle y_{n+1}}
is the RK4 approximation of
y
(
t
n
+
1
)
{\displaystyle y(t_{n+1})}
, and the next value (
y
n
+
1
{\displaystyle y_{n+1}}
) is determined by the present value (
y
n
{\displaystyle y_{n}}
) plus the weighted average of four increments, where each increment is the product of the size of the interval, h, and an estimated slope specified by function f on the right-hand side of the differential equation.
k
1
{\displaystyle k_{1}}
is the slope at the beginning of the interval, using
y
{\displaystyle y}
(Euler's method);
k
2
{\displaystyle k_{2}}
is the slope at the midpoint of the interval, using
y
{\displaystyle y}
and
k
1
{\displaystyle k_{1}}
;
k
3
{\displaystyle k_{3}}
is again the slope at the midpoint, but now using
y
{\displaystyle y}
and
k
2
{\displaystyle k_{2}}
;
k
4
{\displaystyle k_{4}}
is the slope at the end of the interval, using
y
{\displaystyle y}
and
k
3
{\displaystyle k_{3}}
.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Runge–Kutta methods” as family of implicit and explicit iterative methods. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as family of implicit and explicit iterative methods. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 29, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q725944. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1900.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Runge–Kutta methods”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Runge–Kutta methods primary sources, Runge–Kutta methods archive and Runge research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Runge–Kutta methods”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Runge–Kutta methods” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.