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

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[ ...

dynamic - How can I make a clickable ArrayPlot that returns input?

I would like to create a dynamic ArrayPlot so that the rectangles, when clicked, provide the input. Can I use ArrayPlot for this? Or is there something else I should have to use? Answer ArrayPlot is much more than just a simple array like Grid : it represents a ranged 2D dataset, and its visualization can be finetuned by options like DataReversed and DataRange . These features make it quite complicated to reproduce the same layout and order with Grid . Here I offer AnnotatedArrayPlot which comes in handy when your dataset is more than just a flat 2D array. The dynamic interface allows highlighting individual cells and possibly interacting with them. AnnotatedArrayPlot works the same way as ArrayPlot and accepts the same options plus Enabled , HighlightCoordinates , HighlightStyle and HighlightElementFunction . data = {{Missing["HasSomeMoreData"], GrayLevel[ 1], {RGBColor[0, 1, 1], RGBColor[0, 0, 1], GrayLevel[1]}, RGBColor[0, 1, 0]}, {GrayLevel[0], GrayLevel...

Is there a way to do conditional matrix loop using 'continue'

I have the following: n = 3; m = 5; ww = RandomReal[{0, 0.1}, {n, n}]; uu = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {m, n}]; pp = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {n, n}]; ss = RandomInteger[{0, 5}, {m, n}]; Grid[{{"ww", "uu", "pp", "ss"}, {ww // TableForm, uu // TableForm, pp // TableForm, ss // TableForm}}, Spacings -> {5, 2}, Dividers -> All] where I would like to look at every element of matrix ss and produce a matrix tt , with zeroes at the locations in ss which have zeroes, and in all other positions do the following: tt = (-1/Subscript[ww, m]) Log[(1 - uu)/(Subscript[pp, m - 1])], where Subscript[ww, m] is the value at index of ww matrix and where Subscript[pp, m - 1] is the value at index-1 of pp matrix. So for example if the first value ever read from matrix ss happens to be 2, then value taken from matrix ww would be from the row 2, but from pp would be from row 1. Also how to tell difference between a 0 as a valid value from within the matrix elemen...