1: \documentclass[a4paper,english,12pt]{article}
2: \setlength{\textwidth}{27pc} \setlength{\textheight}{43pc}
3: \usepackage[logonly]{trace}
4: \usepackage{babel}
5: \usepackage{amsfonts, amsmath, amssymb}
6: \usepackage{graphicx}
7: \usepackage{pstricks}
8: \usepackage{psfig}
9: \usepackage{multirow}
10: \usepackage{fancyhdr}
11: \usepackage{vmargin, fancybox}
12:
13:
14: \newcommand{\mathsym}[1]{{}}
15: \newcommand{\unicode}{{}}
16: \newcommand{\SJour}{\textsc{SVJour}}
17:
18:
19: \usepackage{theorem} \theorembodyfont{\upshape}
20:
21: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
22: \newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
23: \newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
24: \newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
25: \newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
26:
27: \def\bfE{\mbox{\boldmath$E$}}
28: \def\bfG{\mbox{\boldmath$G$}}
29: \usepackage{graphicx}
30: \usepackage{pstricks}
31: \usepackage{psfig}
32:
33:
34: \title{DRP scheme optimization}
35:
36:
37: % The thanks line in the title should be filled in if there is
38: % any support acknowledgement for the overall work to be included
39: % This \thanks is also used for the received by date info, but
40: % authors are not expected to provide this.
41:
42: \author{Claire David *$\dag$ and Pierre Sagaut \thanks{Universit\'e Pierre et Marie Curie-Paris 6,
43: Laboratoire de Mod\'elisation en M\'ecanique, UMR CNRS 7607, Bo\^ite
44: courrier $n^0162$, 4 place Jussieu, 75252 Paris cedex 05, France -
45: tel. (+33)1.44.27.62.13; Fax (+33)1.44.27.52.59 ($\dag$
46: corresponding author: { david@lmm.jussieu.fr}).}}
47:
48:
49: \begin{document}
50:
51: \maketitle
52:
53: \begin{abstract}
54: A new DRP scheme is built, which enables us to minimize the error
55: due to the finite difference approximation, by means of an
56: equivalent matrix equation.
57: \end{abstract}
58:
59: \noindent{\textbf{keywords}}\\DRP schemes, Sylvester equation
60:
61:
62: \pagestyle{myheadings} \thispagestyle{plain} \markboth{CL. DAVID AND
63: P. SAGAUT}{DRP SCHEME OPTIMIZATION}
64:
65:
66: \section{Introduction: Scheme classes}
67: \label{sec:intro}
68:
69: \indent We hereafter propose a method that enables us to build a DRP
70: scheme while minimizing the error due to the finite difference
71: approximation, by means of an equivalent matrix equation.\\
72: \\
73:
74:
75: \noindent Consider the transport equation:
76: \begin{equation}
77: \label{transp} \frac{\partial u}{\partial t}+\frac{\partial
78: u}{\partial x}=0 \,\,\, , \,\,\, x \,\in \,[0,L], \,\,\,t \,\in
79: \,[0,T]
80: \end{equation}
81:
82: \noindent with the initial condition $u(x,t=0)=u_0(x)$.
83:
84: \bigskip
85:
86: \begin{proposition}
87:
88: \noindent A finite difference scheme for this equation can be
89: written under the form:
90: \begin{equation} \label{scheme} {{{{{\alpha \, u}}_i}}^{n+1}}+
91: {{{{{\beta \,u}}_i}}^{n}}
92: +{{{{{\gamma \,u}}_i}}^{n-1}}
93: +\delta \,{{{u_{i+1}}}^n}+{{{{{\varepsilon \, u}}_{i-1}}}^n}
94: +{{{{{\zeta \,u}}_{i+1}}}^{n+1}}
95: +{{{{{\eta \,u}}_{i-1}}}^{n-1}}+{{{{{\theta \,u}}_{i-1}}}^{n+1}}+\vartheta \,{{ u}_{i+1}}^{n-1} =0
96: \end{equation}
97:
98: \noindent where:
99: \begin{equation}
100: {u_l}^m=u\,(l\,h, m\,\tau)
101: \end{equation}
102: \noindent $l\, \in \, \{i-1,\, i, \, i+1\}$, $m \, \in \, \{n-1,\,
103: n, \, n+1\}$, $j=0, \, ..., \, n_x$, $n=0, \, ..., \, n_t$, $h$,
104: $\tau$ denoting respectively the mesh size and time step ($L=n_x\,h$, $T=n_t\,\tau$).\\
105: The Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy number ($cfl$) is defined as $\sigma = c \,\tau / h$ .\\
106: \\
107:
108:
109: A numerical scheme is specified by selecting appropriate values of
110: the coefficients $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, $\delta$,
111: $\varepsilon$, $\zeta$, $\eta$, $\theta$ and $\vartheta$ in
112: equation (\ref{scheme}), which, for sake of usefulness, will be
113: written as:
114: \begin{equation}
115: \alpha=\alpha_x+\alpha_t\,\,\, , \,\,\,\beta=\beta_x+\beta_t\,\,\, ,
116: \,\,\,\gamma=\gamma_x+\gamma_t\,\,\, ,
117: \,\,\,\delta=\delta_x+\delta_t\,\,\, ,
118: \,\,\,\varepsilon=\varepsilon_x+\varepsilon_t\,\,\, , \,\,\,
119: \end{equation}
120: \noindent where the "$_x$" denotes a dependance towards the mesh
121: size $h$, while the "$_t$" denotes a dependance towards the time
122: step
123: $\tau$.\\
124: \noindent Values corresponding to numerical schemes retained for
125: the present works are given in Table \ref{SchemeTable}.
126: \end{proposition}
127: \bigskip
128:
129:
130:
131: \begin{table}
132: \caption{Numerical scheme coefficient.}
133: \begin{center} \footnotesize
134: {\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc} \hline
135: Name & $ \alpha $ & $ \beta$ & $\gamma$ & $\delta $ & $\epsilon$ & $\zeta$ & $\eta$ & $\theta$ & $\vartheta$ \\
136: \hline
137: & $ \alpha_x+\alpha_t $ & $ \beta_x+\beta_t$ & $\gamma_x+\gamma_t$ & $\delta_x+\delta_t $ &
138: $\varepsilon_x+\varepsilon_t$ & & & & \\
139: \hline
140: %1st order Upwind & $\frac{1}{ \tau} $ & $ \frac{-1}{ \tau} + \frac{c}{ h} $ & 0 & 0 & $ \frac{ - c}{h} $ & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
141: Leapfrog & $\frac{1}{2 \tau} $ & 0 & $\frac{-1}{2 \tau} $ & $
142: \frac{1}{ 2 h} $ &
143: $ \frac{-1}{ 2 h} $ & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
144: Lax & $\frac{1}{ \tau} $ & 0 & 0 & $ \frac{1}{ 2 h } - \frac{1}{ 2
145: \tau} $ &
146: $ - \frac{1}{ 2 h}- \frac{1}{2 \tau} $ & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
147: Lax-Wendroff & $\frac{1}{ \tau} $ & $ \frac{1 \tau}{ h ^2}-\frac{1}{ \tau} $ & 0 & $ \frac{1- \sigma }{ 2 h} $
148: & $ \frac{-( 1+ \sigma ) }{ 2 h } $ & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
149: Crank-Nicolson & $ \frac{1}{ h ^2}+\frac{1}{ \tau} $ & $
150: \frac{1}{ h ^2}-\frac{1}{ \tau} $ & 0 & $ \frac{-1}{ h ^2} $ & $
151: \frac{-1}{ h ^2 } $ & 0 & $ \frac{-1}{ h ^2} $ & $ \frac{-1}{ h ^2}
152: $ & 0
153: \end{tabular}}
154: \end{center}
155: \label{SchemeTable}
156: \end{table}
157:
158:
159:
160:
161: \noindent The number of time steps will be denoted $n_t$, the number
162: of space
163: steps, $n_x$. In general, $n_x\gg n_t$.\\
164:
165:
166: \noindent In the following: the only dependance of the coefficients
167: towards the time step $\tau$ existing only in the Crank-Nicolson
168: scheme, we will restrain our study to the specific case:
169:
170:
171: \begin{equation}
172: \alpha_t=\gamma_t=\zeta=\eta=\theta=\vartheta=0
173: \end{equation}
174:
175:
176: \noindent The paper is organized as follows. The building of the DRP
177: scheme is exposed in section \ref{DRP}. The equivalent matrix
178: equation, which enables us to minimize the error due to the finite
179: difference approximation, is presented in section \ref{Sylv}. A
180: numerical example is given in section \ref{Ex}.
181:
182:
183:
184:
185: \section{The DRP scheme}
186: \label{DRP}
187:
188: \noindent The first derivative $\frac{\partial
189: u}{\partial x}$ is approximated at the $l^{th}$ node of the spatial
190: mesh by:
191:
192: \begin{equation}\label{approx}
193: (\, \frac{\partial u}{\partial
194: x}\,)_l \simeq
195: {{{{{\beta_x \,u}}_{l+i}}}^{n}}
196: +\delta_x \,{{{u_{l+i+1}}}^n}+{{{{{\varepsilon_x\,
197: u}}_{l+i-1}}}^n}
198: \end{equation}
199: \noindent Following the method exposed by C. Tam and J. Webb in
200: \cite{Tam}, the coefficients $\beta_x$, $\delta_x$, and
201: $\varepsilon_x$ are determined requiring the Fourier Transform of
202: the finite difference scheme (\ref{approx}) to be a close
203: approximation of the partial derivative $ (\, \frac{\partial
204: u}{\partial x}\,
205: )_l$.\\
206: \noindent (\ref{approx}) is a special case of:
207:
208:
209: \begin{equation}\label{approx_Cont}
210: (\, \frac{\partial u}{\partial
211: x}\,)_l \simeq
212: \beta_x \,u(x+i\,h)
213: +\delta_x \,u(x+(i+1)\,h)+\varepsilon_x\,u(x+(i-1)\,h)
214: \end{equation}
215:
216: \noindent where $x$ is a continuous variable, and can be recovered
217: setting $x=l\,h$.\\
218: \noindent Applying the Fourier transform, referred to by
219: $\,\widehat{\, }$ , to both sides of (\ref{approx_Cont}), yields:
220:
221:
222: \begin{equation}
223: \label{Wavenb}
224: j\, \omega \, \widehat{u} \simeq \left \lbrace
225: \beta_x \,e^{\,0}
226: +\delta_x \,e^{\,j\,\omega\,h}+\varepsilon_x\,e^{\,-\,j\,\omega\,h}
227: \right \rbrace \, \widehat{u}
228: \end{equation}
229: \noindent $j$ denoting the complex square root of $-1$.\\
230:
231:
232:
233:
234: %\noindent The general dispersion relation associated with the
235: %discrete scheme (\ref{scheme}) is
236:
237: %\begin{equation}
238: % \alpha_x \, e^{\,j\, \varphi } +\gamma_x \,e^{\,j \,\varphi }\,e^{\,2\, j \,\omega \,\tau
239: % } +\{\beta +e^{\,j \,\varphi }\,\delta +\varepsilon \}\,e^{\,j \,\varphi
240: % }e^{\,j\,\omega \,\tau}
241: %=0
242: %\end{equation}
243:
244: %\noindent which is a non linear quadratic equation in $e^{\,j\,
245: %\omega \,\tau }$ that can easily been solved.
246:
247:
248: \noindent Comparing the two sides of (\ref{Wavenb}) enables us to
249: identify the wavenumber $ \overline{\lambda}$ of the finite
250: difference scheme (\ref{approx}) and the quantity $\frac{1}{j}\,
251: \left \lbrace\beta_x \,e^{\,0}
252: +\delta_x
253: \,e^{\,j\,\omega\,h}+\varepsilon_x\,e^{\,-\,j\,\omega\,h}\,\right
254: \rbrace$, i. e.:
255: \noindent The wavenumber of the finite difference scheme
256: (\ref{approx}) is thus:
257:
258: \begin{equation}
259: \overline{\lambda}=-\,j\, \left \lbrace\beta_x \,e^{\,0}
260: +\delta_x
261: \,e^{\,j\,\omega\,h}+\varepsilon_x\,e^{\,-\,j\,\omega\,h}\,\right \rbrace
262: \end{equation}
263:
264: \noindent To ensure that the Fourier transform of the finite
265: difference scheme is a good approximation of the partial derivative
266: $ (\, \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}\, )_l$ over the range of waves
267: with wavelength longer than $4\,h$, the a priori unknowns
268: coefficients $\beta_x$, $\delta_x$, and $\varepsilon_x$ must be
269: choosen so as to minimize the integrated error:
270:
271:
272: \begin{equation}\begin{array}{rcl}
273: {\mathcal E} &=&\int_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^{\frac{\pi}{2}} | \lambda \,h- \overline{\lambda}
274: \,h|^2\,d(\lambda \,h)\\
275: &=& \int_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^{\frac{\pi}{2}} | \kappa+j\,h\,\left \lbrace\beta_x \,e^{\,0}
276: +\delta_x
277: \,e^{\,j\,\kappa}+\varepsilon_x\,e^{\,-\,j\,\kappa}\,\right \rbrace\,|^2\,d(\kappa)
278: \end{array}
279: \end{equation}
280:
281: \noindent The conditions that ${\mathcal E}$ is a minimum are:
282:
283: \begin{equation}
284: \frac{\partial {\mathcal E}}{\partial \beta_x}=\frac{\partial
285: {\mathcal E}}{\partial \delta_x}=\frac{\partial {\mathcal E}}{\partial \varepsilon_x}=0
286: \end{equation}
287:
288: \noindent and provide the following system of linear algebraic
289: equations:
290:
291:
292: \begin{equation}\left \lbrace
293: \begin{array}{rcl}
294: 2 \,\pi \,h\, \beta_x +4 \,(h\,\delta_x +h\,\varepsilon_x -1)&=&0\\
295: 4 \,h\,\beta_x +\pi \, (2\,
296: \delta_x -1)&=&0\\
297: 4 \,h\,\beta_x +2 \,\pi \, h\,\varepsilon_x &=&0
298: \end{array} \right.
299: \end{equation}
300:
301:
302:
303: \noindent which enables us to determine the required values of
304: $\beta_x$, $\delta_x$, and $\varepsilon_x$:
305:
306:
307:
308: \begin{equation}
309: \label{Opt_Values1}\left \lbrace
310: \begin{array}{rcl}
311: \beta_x &=& \beta_x^{opt} \,=\, \frac{\pi }{h\,(\pi ^2-8)}\\
312: \delta_x &=&\delta_x^{opt}\,=\, \frac{1}{2}-\frac{2}{h\,(\pi ^2-8)}\\
313: \varepsilon_x &=&\varepsilon_x^{opt}\,=\, -\frac{2}{h\,(\pi ^2-8)}\\
314: \end{array} \right.
315: \end{equation}
316:
317:
318: \section{The Sylvester equation}
319: \label{Sylv}
320: \subsection{Matricial form of the finite differences problem}
321:
322:
323:
324: \begin{theorem}
325: The problem (\ref{scheme}) can be written under the following
326: matricial form:
327: \begin{equation}
328: \label{Eq} {M_1}\,U +U\,M_2+{\cal{L}}(U)=M_0
329: \end{equation}
330:
331: \noindent where $M_1$ and $M_2$ are square matrices respectively
332: $n_x-1$ by $n_x-1$, $n_t$ by $n_t$, given by:
333: \begin{equation}
334: \begin{array}{ccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
335: {M_1}= \left (
336: \begin{array}{ccccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
337: \beta & \delta & 0 & \ldots & 0 \\
338: \varepsilon& \beta & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots \\
339: 0 & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & 0\\
340: \vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \beta & \delta\\
341: 0 & \ldots & 0 & \varepsilon & \beta\\
342: \end{array} \right ) &
343: & {M_2}= \left (
344: \begin{array}{ccccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
345: 0 & \gamma& 0 & \ldots & 0 \\
346: \alpha & 0 & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots \\
347: 0 & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & 0\\
348: \vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \gamma\\
349: 0 & \ldots & 0 & \alpha & 0\\
350: \end{array} \right )
351: \end{array}
352: \end{equation}
353:
354: \noindent the matrix $M_0$ being given by:
355: \bigskip
356: \begin{equation}
357: \label{M0}
358: \scriptsize{{M_0}= \left (
359: \begin{array}{ccccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
360: -\gamma \,u_1^0
361: -\varepsilon \,u_{0}^1-\eta\,u_0^0-\theta\,u_{0}^{2}-\vartheta\,u_{2}^{0}
362: & -\varepsilon \,u_{0}^2 -\eta\,u_0^1-\theta\,u_{0}^{3}& \ldots & \ldots &
363: -\varepsilon \,u_{0}^{n_t}-\eta\,u_{0}^{n_t-1} \\
364: -\gamma \,u_2^0-\eta\,u_{1}^{0}-\vartheta\,u_{3}^{0}
365: & 0
366: & \ldots & \ldots & 0 \\
367: \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots\\
368: -\gamma \,u_{n_x-2}^0-\eta\,u_{n_x-2}^{0}-\vartheta\,u_{n_x-1}^{0}
369: & 0
370: & \ldots & \ldots & 0 \\
371: -\gamma \,u_{n_x-1}^0-\delta \,u_{n_x}^{1}-\eta\,u_{n_x-2}^{0}-\zeta\,u_{n_x}^{2}-\vartheta\,u_{n_x}^{0}
372: & -\delta \,u_{n_x}^{2} -\zeta\,u_{n_x}^{3}-\vartheta\,u_{n_x}^{1}& \ldots
373: & \ldots & -\delta \,u_{n_x}^{n_t}-\vartheta\,u_{n_x}^{n_t-1}\\
374: \end{array} \right )}
375: \end{equation}
376:
377:
378:
379:
380: \bigskip
381: \noindent and where ${\cal {L}}$ is a linear matricial operator
382: which can be written as: \begin{equation} {\cal {L}}={\cal
383: {L}}_1+{\cal {L}}_2+{\cal {L}}_3+{\cal {L}}_4
384: \end{equation}
385: \noindent where ${\cal {L}}_1$, ${\cal {L}}_2$, ${\cal {L}}_3$ and
386: ${\cal {L}}_4$ are given by:
387: \begin{equation}
388: \begin{array}{ccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
389: {\cal {L}}_1(U) = \zeta \left (
390: \begin{array}{ccccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
391: u_2^2 & u_2^3 & \ldots & u_2^{n_t} & 0\\
392: u_3^2 & u_3^3 & \ldots & \vdots & \vdots \\
393: \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots\\
394: u_{n_x-1}^2 & u_{n_x-1}^3 & \ldots & u_{n_x-1}^{n_t}& 0 \\
395: 0 & 0 & \ldots & 0& 0 \\
396: \end{array}
397: \right )
398: &
399: & {\cal {L}}_2(U) = \eta \left (
400: \begin{array}{ccccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
401: 0 & 0 & \ldots & 0& 0 \\
402: 0 & u_1^1 & u_1^2 & \ldots & u_1^{n_t-1} \\
403: 0 & u_1^0 & u_1^1 & \ldots & u_2^{n_t-1} \\
404: \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
405: 0 & u_{n_x-2}^1 & u_{n_x-2}^2 & \ldots & u_{n_x-2}^{n_t-1} \\
406: \end{array}
407: \right )
408: \end{array}
409: \end{equation}
410:
411:
412: \begin{equation}
413: \begin{array}{ccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
414: {\cal {L}}_3(U) = \theta \left (
415: \begin{array}{ccccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
416: 0 & \ldots & \ldots & \ldots & 0 \\
417: u_1^2 & u_1^3 & \ldots & u_1^{n_t}& 0 \\
418: u_2^2 & u_2^3 & \ldots & u_2^{n_t}& 0 \\
419: \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\
420: u_{n_x-2}^2 & u_{n_x-2}^3 & \ldots & u_{n_x-2}^{n_t}& 0 \\
421: \end{array}
422: \right )
423: &
424: & {\cal {L}}_4(U) = \vartheta \left (
425: \begin{array}{ccccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
426: 0 & u_2^1 & u_2^2 & \ldots & u_2^{n_t-1} \\
427: 0 & u_3^1 & u_3^2 & \ldots & u_3^{n_t-1} \\
428: \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots\\
429: 0 & u_{n_x-1}^1& \ldots & \ldots & u_{n_x-1}^{n_t-1} \\
430: 0 & 0 & \ldots & \ldots & 0\\
431: \end{array}
432: \right )
433: \end{array}
434: \end{equation}
435: \bigskip
436:
437:
438: \end{theorem}
439:
440: \bigskip
441:
442: \begin{proposition}
443: \noindent The second member matrix $M_0$ bears the initial
444: conditions, given for the specific value $n=0$, which correspond to
445: the initialization process when computing loops, and the boundary
446: conditions, given for the specific values $i=0$, $i=n_x$.
447: \end{proposition}
448:
449: \bigskip
450:
451:
452: \noindent Denote by $u_{exact}$ the exact solution of (\ref{transp}).\\
453: \noindent The corresponding matrix $U_{exact}$ will be:
454:
455: \begin{equation}
456: U_{exact}=[{{{U_{{exact}_i}}}^n}{]_{\, 1\leq i\leq {n_x-1},\, 1\leq
457: n\leq {n_t}\, }} \end{equation} where:
458:
459: \begin{equation}
460: {U_{exact}}_i^n=U_{exact}(x_i,t_n)
461: \end{equation}
462:
463: \noindent with $x_i=i \; h$, $t_n=n \; \tau$. \bigskip
464:
465: \bigskip
466:
467: \begin{definition}
468: \noindent We will call \textit{error matrix} the matrix defined by:
469: \begin{equation}
470: \label{err}
471: E=U-U_{exact}
472: \end{equation}
473: \end{definition}
474:
475:
476: \bigskip
477:
478:
479: \noindent Consider the matrix $F$ defined by:
480: \begin{equation} F={M_1}\,U_{exact}+U_{exact}\,M_2 + {\cal{L}}(U_{exact})-M_0\end{equation}
481:
482: \bigskip
483:
484: \begin{proposition}
485: \noindent The \textit{error matrix} $E$ satisfies:
486:
487: \begin{equation}
488: \label{eqmtr}
489: {M_1}\,E+E\,M_2+{\cal{L}}(E)=F
490: \end{equation}
491:
492: \end{proposition}
493:
494:
495: \subsection{The matrix equation}
496:
497:
498:
499: \begin{theorem}
500: \noindent Minimizing the error due to the approximation induced by
501: the numerical scheme is equivalent to minimizing the norm of the
502: matrices $E$ satisfying (\ref{eqmtr}).
503: \end{theorem}
504:
505:
506: \bigskip
507:
508: {\em Note:} \noindent Since the linear matricial operator
509: ${\cal{L}}$ appears only in the Crank-Nicolson scheme, we will
510: restrain our study to the case ${\cal{L}}=0$. The generalization to
511: the case ${\cal{L}} \neq 0$ can be easily deduced.
512:
513:
514: \bigskip
515:
516:
517:
518: \begin{proposition}
519:
520: \noindent The problem is then the determination of the minimum norm solution
521: of:
522:
523: \begin{equation}
524: \label{SylvErr}
525: {M_1}\,E+E\,M_2=F
526: \end{equation}
527:
528: \noindent which is a specific form of the Sylvester equation:
529:
530: \begin{equation}
531: \label{SylvGen}
532: AX+XB=C
533: \end{equation}
534: where $A$ and $B$ are respectively $m$ by $m$ and $n$ by $n$
535: matrices, $C$ and $X$, $m$ by $n$ matrices.
536:
537: \end{proposition}
538:
539: \bigskip
540:
541:
542:
543:
544:
545:
546:
547: \subsection{Minimization of the error} \label{MinErr}
548:
549: \subsubsection{Theory}
550:
551:
552:
553: \noindent Calculation yields:
554:
555:
556: \footnotesize \noindent \begin{equation}\left \lbrace
557: \begin{array}{ccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
558: {M_1}\,^T M_1&=& diag \big
559: (\left ( \begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
560: \beta^2+ \delta^2 & \beta\,(\delta+\varepsilon) \\
561: \beta\,(\delta+\varepsilon) &\varepsilon^2+ \beta^2 \\
562: \end{array} \right ),\ldots, \left ( \begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
563: \beta^2+ \delta^2 & \beta\,(\delta+\varepsilon) \\
564: \beta\,(\delta+\varepsilon) &\varepsilon^2+ \beta^2 \\
565: \end{array} \right )
566: \big )\\ {M_2}\,^T M_2&=&
567: diag \big
568: (\left ( \begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
569: \gamma^2 & 0 \\
570: 0 &\alpha^2\\
571: \end{array} \right ),\ldots, \left ( \begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
572: \gamma^2 & 0 \\
573: 0 &\alpha^2 \\
574: \end{array} \right )
575: \end{array} \right.
576: \end{equation}
577:
578: \normalsize \noindent The singular values of $M_1$ are the singular
579: values of the block matrix $\big
580: (\left ( \begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
581: \beta^2+ \delta^2 & \beta\,(\delta+\varepsilon) \\
582: \beta\,(\delta+\varepsilon) &\varepsilon^2+ \beta^2 \\
583: \end{array} \right )$, i. e. \begin{equation} \frac{1}{2} \,(2 \beta ^2+\delta
584: ^2+\varepsilon
585: ^2-(\delta +\varepsilon ) \,\sqrt{4 \beta ^2+\delta
586: ^2+\varepsilon ^2-2 \delta \, \varepsilon }) \end{equation} \noindent of order $\frac {n_x-1}{2}$, and \begin{equation} \frac{1}{2} \,(2 \beta
587: ^2+\delta ^2+\varepsilon
588: ^2+(\delta +\varepsilon ) \,\sqrt{4 \beta ^2+\delta
589: ^2+\varepsilon ^2-2 \delta \, \varepsilon }) \end{equation} \noindent of order $\frac {n_x-1}{2}$.\\
590:
591: \noindent The singular values of $M_2$ are $\alpha^2 $, of order
592: $\frac {n_t}{2}$, and $\gamma^2 $, of order $\frac {n_t}{2}$.
593:
594:
595:
596:
597: \noindent Consider the singular value decomposition of the matrices
598: $M_1$ and $M_2$:
599:
600: \begin{equation}
601: U_1^T\,M_1\,V_1=\left (
602: \begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
603: \widetilde{M_1} &0 \\
604: 0& 0\\
605: \end{array} \right )
606: \,\,\, , \,\,\, U_2^T\,M_1\,V_2=\left (
607: \begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
608: \widetilde{M_2} &0 \\
609: 0& 0\\
610: \end{array} \right )
611: \end{equation}
612:
613: \noindent where $U_1$, $V_1$, $U_2$, $V_2$, are orthogonal matrices.
614: \noindent $\widetilde{M_1}$, $\widetilde{M_2}$ are diagonal
615: matrices, the diagonal terms of which are respectively the nonzero
616: eigenvalues of the symmetric matrices $M_1\,^T M_1$, $M_2\,^T
617: M_2$.\\
618:
619: \noindent Multiplying respectively \ref{SylvErr} on the left side by
620: $^T U_1$, on the right side by $V_2$, yields:
621:
622: \begin{equation}
623: U_1^T\,M_1\,E\,V_2+U_1^T\,E\,M_2\,V_2=U_1^T\,F\,V_2
624: \end{equation}
625:
626: \noindent which can also be taken as:
627: \begin{equation}
628: ^T U_1\,M_1\,V_1 \,^T V_1\,E\,V_2+^T U_1\,E\,^T U_2\,^T
629: U_2\,M_2\,V_2=U_1^T\,F\,V_2
630: \end{equation}
631:
632: \noindent Set:
633:
634: \begin{equation}
635: ^T V_1\,E\,V_2= \left (
636: \begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
637: \widetilde{E_{11}} & \widetilde{E_{12}} \\
638: \widetilde{E_{21}} & \widetilde{E_{22}}\\
639: \end{array} \right )
640: \,,\,^T U_1\,E\,^T U_2= \left (\begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
641: \widetilde{\widetilde{E_{11}}} & \widetilde{\widetilde{E_{12}}} \\
642: \widetilde{\widetilde{E_{21}}} & \widetilde{\widetilde{E_{22}}}\\
643: \end{array} \right )
644: \end{equation}
645:
646: \begin{equation}
647: \label{Ftilde} ^T U_1\,F\,V_2= \left (
648: \begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
649: \widetilde{F_{11}} & \widetilde{F_{12}} \\
650: \widetilde{F_{21}} & \widetilde{F_{22}}\\
651: \end{array} \right )
652: \end{equation}
653: \noindent We have thus:
654: \begin{equation}\left (\begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
655: \widetilde{M_{1}}\,\widetilde{E_{11}} & \widetilde{M_{1}}\,\widetilde{E_{12}} \\
656: 0 & 0\\
657: \end{array} \right )+\left (\begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
658: \widetilde{\widetilde{E_{11}}}\,\widetilde{M_{2}} & 0 \\
659: \widetilde{\widetilde{E_{21}}}\,\widetilde{M_{2}} & 0\\
660: \end{array} \right )=\left (\begin{array}{cc}% autant de c que de colonnes
661: \widetilde{F_{11}} & \widetilde{F_{12}} \\
662: \widetilde{F_{21}} & \widetilde{F_{22}}\\
663: \end{array} \right )
664: \end{equation}
665:
666: \noindent It yields:
667: \begin{equation}
668: \left \lbrace
669: \begin{array}{ccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
670: \widetilde{M_{1}}\,\widetilde{E_{11}} +
671: \widetilde{\widetilde{E_{11}}}\,\widetilde{M_{2}}&=&\widetilde{F_{11}}\\
672: \widetilde{M_{1}} \,\widetilde{E_{12}}&=&\widetilde{F_{12}}\\
673: \widetilde{\widetilde{E_{21}}}\,\widetilde{M_{2}}&=&\widetilde{F_{21}}\\
674: \end{array} \right.
675: \end{equation}
676:
677:
678: \noindent One easily deduces:
679: \begin{equation}
680: \left \lbrace
681: \begin{array}{ccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
682: \widetilde{E_{12}}&=&{\widetilde{M}_{1}}^{-1}\,\widetilde{F_{12}}\\
683: {\widetilde{\widetilde{E}_{21}}}&=&\widetilde{F_{21}}\,{\widetilde{M_{2}}}^{-1}\\
684: \end{array} \right.
685: \end{equation}
686:
687:
688: \noindent The problem is then the determination of the
689: $\widetilde{E_{11}}$ and $\widetilde{\widetilde{E_{11}}}$
690: satisfying:
691:
692: \begin{equation}
693: \label{Pb} \widetilde{M_{1}}\,\widetilde{E_{11}} +
694: \widetilde{\widetilde{E_{11}}}\,\widetilde{M_{2}}=\widetilde{F_{11}}
695: \end{equation}
696:
697:
698: \noindent Denote respectively by $\widetilde{e_{ij}}$,
699: $\widetilde{\widetilde{e_{ij}}}$ the components of the matrices
700: $\widetilde{E}$, $\widetilde{\widetilde{E}}$.\\
701: \noindent The problem \ref{Pb} uncouples into the independent
702: problems:\\ \noindent minimize
703: \begin{equation}
704: \sum_{i,j} {\widetilde{e_{ij}}}^2+{\widetilde{\widetilde{e_{ij}}}}^2
705: \end{equation}
706:
707: \noindent under the constraint \begin{equation}
708: \widetilde{M_{1}}_{ii}\,
709: {\widetilde{e_{ij}}}+\widetilde{M_{2_{ii}}}\,{\widetilde{\widetilde{e_{ij}}}}=\widetilde{F_{11}}_{ij}
710: \end{equation}
711: \noindent This latter problem has the solution:
712:
713: \begin{equation}\left \lbrace
714: \begin{array}{ccc}% autant de c que de colonnes
715: \widetilde{e_{ij}}
716: &=&\frac{\widetilde{{M_{1}}_{ii}}\,\widetilde{{F_{11}}_{ij}}}
717: {{\widetilde{{M_{1}}_{ii}}}^2+{\widetilde{{M_{2}}_{jj}}^2}}\\
718: \widetilde{\widetilde{e_{ij}}} &=&\frac{\widetilde{{M_{2}}
719: _{jj}}\,\widetilde{{F_{11}}_{ij}}}{{\widetilde{{M_{1}}_{ii}}}^2+{\widetilde{{M_{2}}_{jj}}^2}}\\
720: \end{array} \right.
721: \end{equation}
722:
723: \noindent The minimum norm solution of \ref{SylvErr} will then be
724: obtained when the norm of the matrix $\widetilde{{F_{11}}}$ is
725: minimum.\\
726: \noindent In the following, the euclidean norm will be considered.
727:
728: \noindent Due to (\ref{Ftilde}):
729: \begin{equation}
730: \|\widetilde{{F_{11}}} \| \leq \|\widetilde{{F}} \| \leq \|U_1
731: \| \,\|F \|\,\|V_2 \| \leq \|U_1
732: \| \,\|V_2 \| \, \|M_1\,U_{exact}+U_{exact}\,M_2-M_0
733: \|
734: \end{equation}
735:
736: \noindent $U_1$ and $V_2$ being orthogonal matrices, respectively
737: $n_x-1$ by $n_x-1$, $n_t$ by $n_t$, we have:
738:
739:
740: \begin{equation}
741: \|U_1
742: \|^2 =n_x-1\,\,\,, \,\,\,\|V_2
743: \|^2 =n_t
744: \end{equation}
745:
746: \noindent Also:
747:
748:
749: \begin{equation}
750: \|M_1
751: \|^2 =\frac{n_x-1}{2}\,\big ( 2\,\beta^2+\delta^2+\varepsilon^2 \big )\,\,\,, \,\,\,
752: \|M_2
753: \|^2 =\frac{n_t}{2}\,\big ( \alpha^2+\gamma^2 \big )
754: \end{equation}
755:
756:
757: \noindent The norm of $M_0$ is obtained thanks to relation
758: (\ref{M0}).
759:
760: \noindent This results in:
761: \begin{equation}
762: \label{Min}
763: \|\widetilde{{F_{11}}} \| \leq \sqrt {n_t\,(n_x-1)} \, \left \lbrace \| U_{exact} \| \,\big (
764: \sqrt{\frac{n_x-1}{2}}\,\sqrt{ 2\,\beta^2+\delta^2+\varepsilon^2 }+
765: \sqrt{\frac{n_t}{2}}\,\sqrt{\alpha^2+\gamma^2 } \,\big )+
766: \|M_0 \|\right \rbrace
767: \end{equation}
768:
769: \noindent $ \|\widetilde{{F_{11}}} \| $ can be minimized through the
770: minimization of the second factor of the right-side member of
771: (\ref{Min}), which is function of the scheme parameters.\\
772:
773: \noindent $\| U_{exact} \| $ is a constant. The quantities $
774: \sqrt{\frac{n_x-1}{2}}\,\sqrt{ 2\,\beta^2+\delta^2+\varepsilon^2
775: }$, $\sqrt{\alpha^2+\gamma^2 } $ and $\|M_0 \|$ being
776: strictly positive, minimizing the second factor of the right-side member
777: of (\ref{Min}) can be obtained through the minimization of the
778: following functions:
779:
780:
781: \begin{equation}
782: \label{func_Sylv}
783: \left \lbrace
784: \begin{array}{rcl}
785: f_1(\beta,\delta,\varepsilon)&=&\sqrt{ 2\,\beta^2+\delta^2+\varepsilon^2}\\
786: f_2(\alpha,\gamma)&=&\sqrt{\alpha^2+\gamma^2 }\\
787: f_3(\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta,\varepsilon)&=&\|M_0 \|\\
788: \end{array} \right.
789: \end{equation}
790:
791:
792:
793: \section{Numerical example: a new DRP scheme}
794:
795: \label{Ex}
796:
797: \noindent Consider the scheme (\ref{scheme}) where the values of
798: $\beta_x$, $\delta_x$, and $\varepsilon_x$ are given by
799: (\ref{Opt_Values1}).\\
800:
801: \noindent Let, in a first time, the values of the coefficients
802: $\alpha$, $\beta_t$, $\gamma$, $\delta_t$, and $\varepsilon_t$
803: remain unknown, and advect a sinusoidal signal
804: \begin{equation} u=\cos\,[\,k \,(x-c\,t)\,]
805: \end{equation}
806: \noindent through this scheme, with Dirichlet boundary
807: conditions. ($c$ is taken equal to 1, and $k= {\pi}$).\\
808:
809: \noindent Calculation yields then:
810:
811: \begin{equation}\scriptsize{
812: \left \lbrace
813: \begin{array}{rcl}
814: f_1(\beta,\delta_x^{opt}+\delta_t,\varepsilon^{opt}+\varepsilon_t)&=&\sqrt{2
815: \left(\,{\beta_t}+\frac{\pi }{4 \,h
816: \left(\pi
817: ^2-8\right)}\right)^2+\left(\,{\delta_t}+\frac{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{2}{\pi
818: ^2-8}}{2
819: h}\right)^2+\left(\,{\varepsilon_t}+\frac{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{2}{\pi
820: ^2-8}}{2
821: h}\right)^2}\\
822: f_2(\alpha,\gamma)&=&\sqrt{\alpha^2+\gamma^2 }\\
823: f_3(\alpha,\beta_x^{opt}+\beta_t,\gamma,\delta_x^{opt}+\delta_t,\varepsilon^{opt}+\varepsilon_t)&=&\sqrt{3 \gamma ^2+3
824: \left(\,{\delta_t}+\frac{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{2}{-8+\pi ^2}}{2
825: h}\right)^2+\left(\gamma -\,{\varepsilon_t}-\frac{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{2}{\pi
826: ^2-8}}{2
827: h}\right)^2+3 \left(\,{\varepsilon_t}+\frac{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{2}{\pi
828: ^2-8}}{2
829: h}\right)^2}\\
830: \end{array} \right.}
831: \end{equation}
832:
833: \noindent Minimum values for $f_1$ and $f_3$ can thus be obtained
834: choosing negative values for $\beta_t$, while choosing positive ones
835: for $\delta_t$ and $\varepsilon_t$, the absolute values of which are
836: respectively close to those of $\beta_x$, $\delta_x$ and
837: $\varepsilon_x$. $f_2$ is minimized choosing $\gamma=0$.\\
838:
839:
840:
841: \noindent In the following, we have choosen to set:
842:
843: \begin{equation}
844: \left \lbrace
845: \begin{array}{rcl}
846: \beta_t&=&-0.9\,\beta_x^{opt}\\
847: \delta_t&=&-0.9\,\delta_x^{opt}\\
848: \varepsilon_t&=&-0.9\,\varepsilon_x^{opt}\\
849: \end{array} \right.
850: \end{equation}
851:
852: \noindent and $\alpha=10$.
853:
854: \noindent The value of the $L_2$ norm of the error, for:
855: \begin{enumerate}
856: \item [\emph{i}.] case 1: our new scheme, with $cfl=0.9$;
857: \item [\emph{ii}.] case 2: the Lax scheme, with $cfl=0.9$;
858: \end{enumerate}
859: \noindent is displayed in Figure \ref{Opt}. The error curve
860: corresponding to the first case is the minimal one.
861:
862:
863: \begin{figure}[ht]
864: \hspace{4cm}
865: \begin{tabular}{c}
866: \psfig{height=4.5cm,width=7cm,angle=0,file=ErreurL2.eps}\\
867: \end{tabular}
868: \caption{\small{Value of the $L_2$ norm of the error}. }
869: \label{Opt}
870: \end{figure}
871:
872:
873:
874:
875: \newpage
876:
877: \section{Conclusion}
878:
879:
880:
881: The above results open new ways for the building of DRP schemes. It
882: seems that the research on this problem has not been performed
883: before as far as our knowledge goes. In the near future, we are
884: going to extend the techniques described herein to nonlinear
885: schemes, in conjunction with other innovative methods as the Lie
886: group theory.
887:
888:
889:
890:
891:
892:
893:
894: \addcontentsline{toc}{section}{\numberline{}References}
895: \begin{thebibliography}{1}
896:
897:
898: \bibitem{Tam}{Tam, C. K. W. and Webb, J. C.(1993)}. {Dispersion-Relation-Preserving Finite Difference Schemes for
899: Computational Acoustics}. J. of Computational Physics, 107, 262-281.
900:
901:
902:
903: \bibitem{Van}{Van Dooren, P.}(1984). {Reduced order observers: A new algorithm and proof}. Systems
904: Control Lett., 4, 243-251.
905:
906:
907:
908: \bibitem{Berman}{A. Berman and Plemmons, R. J.(1994)}. {Nonnegative Matrices in the Mathematical
909: Sciences}. SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.
910:
911:
912:
913: \bibitem{Gail}{Gail, H. R., Hantler, S.L. and Taylor B. A.}(1996). {Spectral Analysis of M/G/1 and G/M/1 type Markov
914: chains}. Adv. Appl. Probab., 28, 114-165.
915:
916:
917: \bibitem{Bol} {Boley, D. L.(1981).} {Computing the Controllability algorithm / Observability
918: Decomposition of a Linear Time-Invariant Dynamic System, A Numerical
919: Approach}. PhD. thesis, Report STAN-CS-81-860, Dept. Comp. i, Sci.,
920: Stanford University.
921:
922:
923: \bibitem{Deif}{Deif, A. S., Seif, N. P. and Hussein, S. A.}(1995). {Sylvester's equation: accuracy and computational
924: stability}. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 61, 1-11.
925:
926:
927: \bibitem{Hearon}{ Hearon},J. Z.(1977). {Nonsingular solutions of $TA-BT = C$}. Linear
928: Algebra and its applications, 16, 57-63.
929:
930:
931: \bibitem{Huo}{Huo}, C. H.(2004). {Efficient methods for solving a nonsymmetric algebraic
932: equation arising in stochastic fluid models}, Journal of
933: Computational and Applied Mathematics, 1-21.
934:
935:
936: \bibitem{Tsui}{Tsui},C. C.(1987). {A complete analytical solution to the equation $TA-FT =
937: LC$ and its applications}. IEEE Trans. Automat. Control AC, 32, pp.
938: 742-744.
939:
940:
941: \bibitem{Zhou}{Zhou, B. and Duan, G. R.}(2005). {An explicit solution to the matrix equation
942: $AX-XF=BY$}. Linear Algebra and its applications, 402, 345-366.
943:
944:
945:
946: \bibitem{Duan}{Duan, G. R.(1992)}. {Solution to matrix equation $AV + BW = EV F$ and
947: eigenstructure assignment for descriptor systems}. Automatica, 28,
948: 639-643.
949:
950:
951: \bibitem{Duan2}{Duan, G. R.(1996).} {On the solution to Sylvester matrix equation $AV + BW = EV F$ and
952: eigenstructure assignment for descriptor systems}. IEEE Trans.
953: Automat. Control AC, 41, 276-280.
954:
955:
956: \bibitem{Kir}{Kirrinnis, P.(2000).} {Fast algorithms for the Sylvester equation $AX-XB^T=C$},
957: Theoretical Computer Science, 259, 623-638.
958:
959: \bibitem{Konst}{Konstantinov, M., Mehrmann, V. and P. Petkov, P.(2000).} {On properties of Sylvester
960: and Lyapunov operators}. Linear Algebra and its applications, 312,
961: 35-71.
962:
963:
964: \bibitem{Var}{Varga, A.(2003).} {TA numerically reliable approach to robust pole assignment for descriptor
965: systems}. Future Generation Computer Systems, 19, 1221-1230.
966:
967: \bibitem{whitham}{Witham, G. B.},(1974). {Linear and Nonlinear Wave}, Wiley-Interscience.
968:
969: \bibitem{wolfram}{Wolfram, S.,(1999).} {The Mathematica book}, Cambridge University Press.
970:
971:
972: \end{thebibliography}
973:
974:
975:
976:
977: \end{document}
978: