Skip to main content

numerical integration - Solving Integro-differential equation numerically with shooting method


This question is related a question I previously asked here


Solving integro-differential equation with boundary condition at infinity


and for which a solution was found . Now I am dealing with a similar problem with different parameters and I can't get a solution although the asymptotic condition is satisfied. The differential equation contains a complicated integral and has to be solved with a shooting method since we have boundary conditions at infinity:s[0]=0 and s[end]=1. I have 2 different sets of parameters and I'm using the code provided in the topic linked above to get the solution


 (*Set 1*)

\[Chi] = Rationalize[3.5, 0]
A = Rationalize[1.6, 0];
a = Rationalize[1.9123, 0];
b = Rationalize[-28.9815, 0];
d = Rationalize[9.5, 0]; 
n = Rationalize[1, 0]
B = Rationalize[1, 0]


(*Set 2*)

\[Chi] = Rationalize[0.548337, 0]
A = Rationalize[1.1809307701602592, 0];
a = Rationalize[14.593441928706284, 0];
b = Rationalize[-23.834284974146534, 0];
d = Rationalize[5.677752578949083, 0];
n = 0;
(*B is useless*)

(*Set 3*)
χ = Rationalize[0.2, 0];

A = Rationalize[3.915543336008174, 0];
a = Rationalize[181.22232071532673, 0];
b = Rationalize[124.88322492316286, 0];
d = Rationalize[-105.81583286477883, 0];
n = Rationalize[0.06779142517329072, 0];
B = Rationalize[0.479615329820981, 0];
end = 20;

I am using a code slightly modified from the one given by @bbgodfrey in the link given above


 end=12;

 eps=10^-5;
 j[x_, r_] = 2 A^2 r x;
 g0[x_, r_] = a + b/2 + 3 d/4 + A^2 (b + d) (x^2 + r^2) + d A^4 ((x^2 + r^2)^2 + 4 x^2 r^2);
 g1[x_, r_] = j[x, r] (b + 2 d) + 4 d A^4 r x (r^2 + x^2);
 jb[x_, r_] = 2 B^2 r x;
 g0b[x_, r_] = n
 s[0][x_] = x/Sqrt[x^2 + 1/4];
 FNB[0] = Interpolation@Rationalize[Table[{r,2 (Pi)^(3/2)/ A E^(-A^2 (r^2)) NIntegrate[(x s[0][x]^2 E^(-A^2 x^2) (g0[x, r] BesselI[0, j[x, r]] - 
         g1[x, r] BesselI[1, j[x, r]])), {x, 0, 30}] + 2 (Pi)^(3/2)/B E^(-B^2 (r^2)) NIntegrate[(x s[0][x]^2 E^(-B^2 x^2) (g0b[x, r] BesselI[0, jb[x, r]])), {x, 0, 30}]}, {r, 0, end, .1}], 0];


mmin = 1; mmax = 15; imax = 200; wp = 75;

Row[{Dynamic[m], "   ", ProgressIndicator[Dynamic[ip], {0, imax}], "   ", ProgressIndicator[Dynamic[rm], {0, end}]}]

Do[eqnNB = u''[r] + u'[r]/r - u[r]/r^2 + u[r] - \[Chi]*u[r]^5 - 
u[r] (FNB[m - 1][r] + FNB[Max[m - 2, 0]][r])/2 == 0;
sp = ParametricNDSolveValue[{eqnNB, u[eps] == 0, u'[eps] == up0, 
WhenEvent[u[r] > 12/10, {bool = 1, "StopIntegration"}], 
WhenEvent[{u[r] < 8/10, u[r] < 0}, {bool = 0,"StopIntegration"}]}, u, {r, eps, end + 1}, {up0, wp0}, 
WorkingPrecision -> wp0, Method -> "StiffnessSwitching",Method -> {"ParametricSensitivity" -> None}, MaxSteps -> 100000];

bl = 1; bu = 10;
Do[bool = -1; bmiddle = (bl + bu)/2; st = sp[bmiddle, wp]; 
rm = st["Domain"][[1, 2]];
If[bool == 0, bl = bmiddle, bu = bmiddle]; ip = i;
If[bool == -1, Return[]], {i, imax}];
s[m] = st; N[bmiddle, wp];
FNB[m] = Interpolation@Rationalize[Table[{r,2 (Pi)^(3/2)/A E^(-A^2 (r^2))      NIntegrate[(x Piecewise[{{s[m][x], 
           eps < x < end}}, 
         s[0][x]]^2 E^(-A^2 (x^2)) (g0[x, r] BesselI[0, j[x, r]] -
          g1[x, r] BesselI[1, j[x, r]])), {x, 0, 30}] + 

   2 (Pi)^(3/2)/
     B E^(-B^2 (r^2)) NIntegrate[(x Piecewise[{{s[m][x], 
           eps < x < end}}, 
         s[0][x]]^2 E^(-B^2 x^2) (g0b[x, r] BesselI[0, 
          jb[x, r]])), {x, 0, 30}]}, {r, 0, end, .1}], 0];, {m,mmin,mmax}]

Plot[Evaluate@Table[s[m][r], {m, mmax - 5, mmax}], {r, eps, end},PlotRange -> All, AxesLabel -> {r, u}, ImageSize -> Large, LabelStyle ->    {Black, Bold, Medium}]
Plot[Evaluate@Table[FNB[m][r], {m, mmax - 5, mmax}], {r, 0, end},PlotRange -> All, AxesLabel -> {r, "FNB"}, ImageSize -> Large,LabelStyle -> {Black, Bold, Medium}]
Plot[Evaluate@Table[s[m][r]^2, {m, mmax - 5, mmax}], {r, 0.01, end}, PlotRange -> All, AxesLabel -> {"r", "n(r)"}, ImageSize -> Large, 
AxesStyle -> Directive[Black, FontSize -> 17,FontFamily -> "TeX Gyre Pagella Math"], LabelStyle -> Directive[Black, FontSize -> 17, FontFamily -> "TeX Gyre Pagella Math"], ImageSize -> {Large}, PlotRange -> All]


For Set 2 integration gets stuck at the first iteration, probably due to divergence, while for Set 1 integration gets stuck at iteration m=4 and i really don't know why: the previous iteration was going on well and fast and were appearing oscillation in the solution that I expect as in the previous case. Here's a picture of how the solution should be (solid line) enter image description here



Answer



Set 1


The code in the question apparently failed to converge, because bl was too large. As explained in the Addendum to my answer to 176883, bl and bu must bracket the final computed value of up0. As it happens, the final value of up0 is approximately 37/100. Setting


bl = 1/5; bu = 4;

meets this requirement with a significant safety margin. (Too much margin can increase runtime by several percent.) With this change, the converged solution after twelve iterations, which requires a few hours, is


Plot[Evaluate@Table[s[i][r], {i, 11, 12}], {r, eps, Min[rm, end]}, PlotRange -> All, 
    AxesLabel -> {r, u}, ImageSize -> Large, LabelStyle -> {Black, Bold, Medium}]


enter image description here


Incidentally, setting u[eps] == up0 eps in the definition of sp is slightly more accurate than setting u[eps] == 0, because the ODE in the question reduces to the Modified Bessel's Equation of order 1 for very small r. The resulting change to the plotted solution is not visible to the eye but can impact the appropriate value of bl.


Set 2


The code in the question definitely failed for Set 2 because the values of bl and bu did not bracket the final value for up0. A small amount of experimentation indicates that


bl = 3/10; bu = 1;

works well, however. Defining


s[0][x_] = x/Sqrt[x^2 + 1];


instead of the expression in the question accelerates convergence of the iterative solution. Finally, replacing end + 1 by end + 2 in the definition of sp improves computation of the solution near r = end. (Increasing the value of end itself also could be considered.) With these changes, ten iterations gives the converged solution


Plot[Evaluate@Table[s[m][r], {m, 9, 10}], {r, eps, end}, PlotRange -> All, 
    AxesLabel -> {r, u}, ImageSize -> Large, LabelStyle -> {Black, Bold, Medium}]

enter image description here


as desired.


Addendum


As requested by the OP, the Set 2 results can be computed with end = 20 in a few hours, yielding


enter image description here


Note that NIntegrate has precision issues for larger values of x, which can be circumvented with the options, WorkingPrecision -> 30, PrecisionGoal -> 8.



Set 3


The OP proposed an additional set of parameters in a comment below.


χ = Rationalize[0.2, 0];
A = Rationalize[3.915543336008174, 0];
a = Rationalize[181.22232071532673, 0];
b = Rationalize[124.88322492316286, 0];
d = Rationalize[-105.81583286477883, 0];
n = Rationalize[0.06779142517329072, 0];
B = Rationalize[0.479615329820981, 0];
end = 20;


It appears that the iterative solution was not converging well for r near end. Enough minor changes were needed to resolve this difficulty that reproducing the resulting code here makes sense. With the functions {j, g0, g1, jb, g0b} as defined in the question, the code is


eps = 10^-5; endp = end + 1;
s[0][x_] = x/Sqrt[x^2 + 1];
FNB[0] = Interpolation@Rationalize[Table[{r, 
    2 (Pi)^(3/2)/A E^(-A^2 (r^2)) NIntegrate[(x s[0][x]^2 E^(-A^2 x^2) 
      (g0[x, r] BesselI[0, j[x, r]] - g1[x, r] BesselI[1, j[x, r]])), {x, 0, 30}, 
      WorkingPrecision -> 30, PrecisionGoal -> 8] + 
     2 (Pi)^(3/2)/B E^(-B^2 (r^2)) NIntegrate[(x s[0][x]^2 E^(-B^2 x^2) 
       (g0b[x, r] BesselI[0, jb[x, r]])), {x, 0, 30}, 

      WorkingPrecision -> 30, PrecisionGoal -> 8]}, {r, 0, endp, 1/10}], 0];

mmin = 1; mmax = 10; imax = 200; wp = 60;
Row[{Dynamic[m], "   ", ProgressIndicator[Dynamic[ip], {0, imax}], 
    "   ", ProgressIndicator[Dynamic[rm], {0, end}]}]
Do[eqnNB = u''[r] + u'[r]/r - u[r]/r^2 + u[r] - χ*u[r]^5 - 
        u[r] (FNB[m - 1][r] + FNB[Max[m - 2, 0]][r])/2 == 0;
    sp = ParametricNDSolveValue[{eqnNB, u[eps] == eps up0, u'[eps] == up0, 
        WhenEvent[u[r] > s[0][end] + 1/5 (1 - r/endp) + 1/200 (r/endp), 
            {bool = 1, "StopIntegration"}], 

        WhenEvent[{u[r] < s[0][end] - 1/5 (1 - r/endp) - 1/200 (r/endp), 
            u[r] < 0}, {bool = 0, "StopIntegration"}]}, 
        u, {r, eps, endp}, {up0, wp0}, WorkingPrecision -> wp0, 
        Method -> "StiffnessSwitching", Method -> {"ParametricSensitivity" -> None}, 
        MaxSteps -> 100000];
    bl = 1/5; bu = 2;
    Do[bool = -1; bmiddle = (bl + bu)/2; st = sp[bmiddle, wp]; 
        rm = st["Domain"][[1, 2]]; 
        If[bool == 0, bl = bmiddle, bu = bmiddle]; ip = i; 
        If[bool == -1, Return[]], {i, imax}];

    s[m] = st; N[bmiddle, wp];
    FNB[m] = Interpolation@Rationalize[Table[{r, 
        2 (Pi)^(3/2)/A E^(-A^2 (r^2)) NIntegrate[(x 
            Piecewise[{{s[m][x], eps < x < end}}, s[0][x]]^2 E^(-A^2 (x^2)) 
            (g0[x, r] BesselI[0, j[x, r]] - g1[x, r] BesselI[1, j[x, r]])), 
            {x, 0, 30}, WorkingPrecision -> 30, PrecisionGoal -> 8] + 
        2 (Pi)^(3/2)/B E^(-B^2 (r^2)) NIntegrate[(x 
            Piecewise[{{s[m][x], eps < x < end}}, s[0][x]]^2 E^(-B^2 x^2) 
            (g0b[x, r] BesselI[0, jb[x, r]])), {x, 0, 30}, 
            WorkingPrecision -> 30, PrecisionGoal -> 8]}, {r, 0, endp, 1/10}], 0];,

 {m, mmin, mmax}];

The main changes involve the WhenEvent criteria for stopping integration when a numerical solution overshoots or undershoots the expected asymptotic value of u, the criteria now being much more restrictive at large r. There are a number of lesser changes as well. The well converged solution is


Plot[Evaluate@Table[s[i][r], {i, mmax - 1, mmax}], {r, eps, Min[rm, end]}, 
    PlotRange -> All, AxesLabel -> {r, u}, ImageSize -> Large, 
    LabelStyle -> {Black, Bold, Medium}]

enter image description here


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]
Post a Comment
Read more

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]
Post a Comment
Read more

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1.
Post a Comment
Read more