may be computed using a number of iterative
 algorithms. The best known such algorithms
 are the Archimedes algorithm, which was derived
 by Pfaff in 1800, and the Brent-Salamin formula.
 Borwein et al. (1989) discuss 
th-order iterative algorithms.
The Brent-Salamin formula is a quadratically converging algorithm.
Another quadratically converging algorithm (Borwein and Borwein 1987, pp. 46-48) is obtained by defining
| 
(1)
 | |||
| 
(2)
 | 
and
| 
(3)
 | |||
| 
(4)
 | 
Then
| 
(5)
 | 
with .
 
 decreases monotonically to 
 with
| 
(6)
 | 
for .
A cubically converging algorithm which converges to the nearest multiple of 
 to 
 is the simple iteration
| 
(7)
 | 
(Beeler et al. 1972). For example, applying to 23 gives the sequence 23, 22.1537796, 21.99186453, 21.99114858, ..., which converges to .
A quartically converging algorithm is obtained by letting
| 
(8)
 | |||
| 
(9)
 | 
then defining
| 
(10)
 | |||
| 
(11)
 | 
Then
| 
(12)
 | 
and 
 converges to 
 quartically with
| 
(13)
 | 
(Borwein and Borwein 1987, pp. 170-171; Bailey 1988, Borwein et al. 1989). This algorithm rests on a modular
 equation identity of order 4. Taking the special case  gives 
 and 
.
A quintically converging algorithm is obtained by letting
| 
(14)
 | |||
| 
(15)
 | 
Then let
| 
(16)
 | 
where
| 
(17)
 | |||
| 
(18)
 | |||
| 
(19)
 | 
Finally, let
| 
(20)
 | 
then
| 
(21)
 | 
(Borwein et al. 1989). This algorithm rests on a modular equation identity of order 5.
Beginning with any positive integer , round up to the nearest multiple of 
, then up to the nearest multiple of 
, and so on, up to the nearest multiple of 1. Let 
 denote the result. Then the ratio
| 
(22)
 | 
David (1957) credits this result to Jabotinski and Erdős and gives the more precise asymptotic result
| 
(23)
 | 
The first few numbers in the sequence  are 1, 2, 4, 6, 10, 12, 18, 22, 30, 34, ... (OEIS A002491).
Another algorithm is due to Woon (1995). Define  and
| 
(24)
 | 
It can be proved by induction that
| 
(25)
 | 
For ,
 the identity holds. If it holds for 
, then
| 
(26)
 | 
but
| 
(27)
 | 
so
| 
(28)
 | 
Therefore,
| 
(29)
 | 
so the identity holds for  and, by induction, for all nonnegative 
, and
| 
(30)
 | |||
| 
(31)
 | |||
| 
(32)
 | 
 
         
	    
	
    

