Skip to main content

differential equations - Why does this stiff BVP return unevaluated but a similar IVP produce a solution?


In Solving a steady-state viscous Burger's equation with NDSolve, one question involves the following problem:


NDSolve[{u''[x] - 20 u[x]*u'[x] == 0, u[-1] == 1.01, u[1] == -1},
u[x], {x, -1, 1}]



NDSolve::ndsz: At x == -0.74236, step size is effectively zero; singularity or stiff system suspected.



(* NDSolve[{-20. u[x] Derivative[1][u][x] + (u^\[Prime]\[Prime])[x] == 0,
u[-1] == 1.01, u[1] == -1}, u[x], {x, -1, 1}] *)

The NDSolve call returns unevaluated. However, the following IVP reports the same problem but produces a partial solution:


NDSolve[{u''[x] - 20 u[x]*u'[x] == 0,
u[-1] == 1.01, u'[-1] == 0.235320844120522},
u[x], {x, -1, 1}]



NDSolve::ndsz: At x == -0.74236, step size is effectively zero; singularity or stiff system suspected.



enter image description here


What's going on?



Answer



I think the first behavior is arguably a bug and I reported a suggested fix ([CASE:4344046]).


When NDSolve uses the Shooting method, sometimes the initial conditions it tries leads to stiffness. At that point the method fails, and NDSolve returns unevaluated. The only message the user sees the stiffness/singularity message NDSolve::ndsz. However, the real error lies in the initial conditions chosen in by the Shooting method, and that is not reported to the user.


I suggest that the shooting method could check for this, and report that specifying "StartingInitialConditions" might help.



Another possible fix is to tweak the implicit solver used to shoot for the initial conditions to see if we can keep it from overshooting too far. For instance, the first attempt succeeds but poorly. However, we can use it to get good guesses for the initial conditions:


sol = NDSolveValue[
{-20 u[x] u'[x] + u''[x] == 0, u[-1] == 1.01`, u[1] == -1},
u, {x, -1, 1},
Method -> {"Shooting",
"ImplicitSolver" -> {"Newton",
"StepControl" -> {"LineSearch",
"MaxRelativeStepSize" -> 1/110}}}];



NDSolveValue::berr: The scaled boundary value residual error of 1307.7304404133247` indicates that the boundary values are not satisfied to specified tolerances. Returning the best solution found.



(* use sol[-1] and sol[1] for the ICs and recompute *)
sol = NDSolveValue[
{-20 u[x] u'[x] + u''[x] == 0, u[-1] == 1.01`, u[1] == -1},
u, {x, -1, 1},
Method -> {"Shooting",
"StartingInitialConditions" -> {u[1] == sol[1], u'[1] == sol'[1]},
"ImplicitSolver" -> {"Newton",
"StepControl" -> {"LineSearch",

"MaxRelativeStepSize" -> 1/110}}}];

ListLinePlot@%

I just kept decreasing "MaxRelativeStepSize" until I found something that almost worked.


Finally, sometimes one needs more control, in which case one can set up one's own shooting method with ParametricNDSolve[]. See for instance How to avoid NDSolve::ndsz problem (singularity problem)


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

front end - keyboard shortcut to invoke Insert new matrix

I frequently need to type in some matrices, and the menu command Insert > Table/Matrix > New... allows matrices with lines drawn between columns and rows, which is very helpful. I would like to make a keyboard shortcut for it, but cannot find the relevant frontend token command (4209405) for it. Since the FullForm[] and InputForm[] of matrices with lines drawn between rows and columns is the same as those without lines, it's hard to do this via 3rd party system-wide text expanders (e.g. autohotkey or atext on mac). How does one assign a keyboard shortcut for the menu item Insert > Table/Matrix > New... , preferably using only mathematica? Thanks! Answer In the MenuSetup.tr (for linux located in the $InstallationDirectory/SystemFiles/FrontEnd/TextResources/X/ directory), I changed the line MenuItem["&New...", "CreateGridBoxDialog"] to read MenuItem["&New...", "CreateGridBoxDialog", MenuKey["m", Modifiers-...

How to thread a list

I have data in format data = {{a1, a2}, {b1, b2}, {c1, c2}, {d1, d2}} Tableform: I want to thread it to : tdata = {{{a1, b1}, {a2, b2}}, {{a1, c1}, {a2, c2}}, {{a1, d1}, {a2, d2}}} Tableform: And I would like to do better then pseudofunction[n_] := Transpose[{data2[[1]], data2[[n]]}]; SetAttributes[pseudofunction, Listable]; Range[2, 4] // pseudofunction Here is my benchmark data, where data3 is normal sample of real data. data3 = Drop[ExcelWorkBook[[Column1 ;; Column4]], None, 1]; data2 = {a #, b #, c #, d #} & /@ Range[1, 10^5]; data = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {10^6, 4}]; Here is my benchmark code kptnw[list_] := Transpose[{Table[First@#, {Length@# - 1}], Rest@#}, {3, 1, 2}] &@list kptnw2[list_] := Transpose[{ConstantArray[First@#, Length@# - 1], Rest@#}, {3, 1, 2}] &@list OleksandrR[list_] := Flatten[Outer[List, List@First[list], Rest[list], 1], {{2}, {1, 4}}] paradox2[list_] := Partition[Riffle[list[[1]], #], 2] & /@ Drop[list, 1] RM[list_] := FoldList[Transpose[{First@li...

plotting - How to draw lines between specified dots on ListPlot?

I would like to create a plot where I have unconnected dots and some connected. So far, I have figured out how to draw the dots. My code is the following: ListPlot[{{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4,13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full] I have thought using ListLinePlot command, but I don't know how to specify to the command to draw only selected lines between the dots. Do have any suggestions/hints on how to do that? Thank you. Answer One possibility would be to use Epilog with Line : ListPlot[ {{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4, 13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full, Epilog -> { Line[ ...