Skip to main content

differential equations - WorkingPrecision in NDSolve causes failure when solving a simple PDE


I have fivefold multiple integral and I wanted a speed calculations. I came across on this Question and had already begun the problems.


Here is a toy example with simple double integral:



f[x_, y_] := x^2*y^2;
NIntegrate[f[x, y], {y, -3, 3}, {x, -3, 3}, WorkingPrecision -> 20]
(* 324.00000000000000000 *)

sol2 = NDSolve[{D[u[x, y], x, y] == f[x, y], u[-3, y] == 0, 
u[x, -3] == 0}, u, {x, -3, 3}, {y, -3, 3}]; 
u[x, y] /. sol2 /. x -> 3 /. y -> 3

(* 324. *)


Yes works,but I change WorkingPrecision in NDSolve they begin to happen strange things:



With WorkingPrecision -> 2



enter image description here



With WorkingPrecision -> 5



enter image description here




With WorkingPrecision -> 10



enter image description here


I have MMA on Windows 8.1 "10.2.0 for Microsoft Windows (64-bit) (July 7, 2015)"



EDITED: 07.06.2018


On Mathematica 11.3:


f[x_, y_] := x^2*y^2;
sol2 = NDSolve[{D[u[x, y], x, y] == f[x, y], u[-3, y] == 0, 
u[x, -3] == 0}, u, {x, -3, 3}, {y, -3, 3}, WorkingPrecision -> 5];

u[x, y] /. sol2 /. x -> 3 /. y -> 3

or:


f[x_, y_] := x^2*y^2;
sol2 = NDSolve[{D[u[x, y], x, y] == f[x, y], u[-3, y] == 0, 
u[x, -3] == 0}, u, {x, -3, 3}, {y, -3, 3},WorkingPrecision -> 20, 
PrecisionGoal -> 8, AccuracyGoal -> 8];
u[x, y] /. sol2[[1]] /. x -> 3 /. y -> 3

gives error: NDSolve::initf: The initialization of the method NDSolve`StateSpace failed..



Issue still persist on MMA 11.3.


With no options like:WorkingPrecision,PrecisionGoal, AccuracyGoal works fine.


f[x_, y_] := x^2*y^2;
sol2 = NDSolve[{D[u[x, y], x, y] == f[x, y], u[-3, y] == 0, 
u[x, -3] == 0}, u, {x, -3, 3}, {y, -3, 3}];
u[x, y] /. sol2[[1]]/. x -> 3 /. y -> 3
(* 324.*)

Answer



Very strange, NDSolve seems to insist on discretizing the PDE to a DAE system, but it should be able to discretize it to a set of ODEs rather than DAEs. The following is a self implementation of method of lines. I'll use pdetoode for discretization.


f[x_, y_] := x^2*y^2;

grid = Array[# &, 25, {-3, 3}];
(* Definition of pdetoode isn't included in this code piece,
   please find it in the link above. *)
ptoo = pdetoode[u[x, y], x, grid, 4];
ode = D[u[x, y], x, y] == f[x, y] // ptoo;
odeic = u[-3, y] == 0 // ptoo;
odebc2 = With[{sf = 10}, Map[# + sf D[#, x] &, ptoo[u[x, -3] == 0]]];

sol = rebuild[sollst, grid];
sol[3, 3]

(*323.9999999697654*)
Plot3D[sol[x, y], {x, -3, 3}, {y, -3, 3}]

Mathematica graphics


As far as I can tell, the above code is just a self implementation of WorkingPrecision -> 16, Method -> {"MethodOfLines", "DifferentiateBoundaryConditions" -> {True, "ScaleFactor" -> 10}, "SpatialDiscretization" -> {"TensorProductGrid", "MaxPoints" -> 25, "MinPoints" -> 25, "DifferenceOrder" -> 4}}, but adding these options to NDSolve won't resolve the problem. Maybe it's a bug, maybe it's due to another undocument feature of "MethodOflines". I suggest you to report it to WRI.


Comments

Post a Comment

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[ ...
Post a Comment
Read more

calculus and analysis - Integral of the Sinc product

Let us consider the following integral $$ B_n = \int_0^\infty \prod_{k=1,3,5,\dots}^n\frac{\sin (x/k)}{x/k}dx $$ By definition, Sinc[x] == Sin[x]/x , therefore B[n_?OddQ] := Integrate[Product[Sinc[x/k], {k, 1, n, 2}], {x, 0, Infinity}] B /@ Range[1, 13, 2] {Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2} OK, everything is fine. But... B[15] 467807924713440738696537864469 Pi/935615849440640907310521750000 What's going on? Answer As Eckhard wrote in comments B[n] is the n-th Borwein integral . (The letter B was not accidental :) ) This funny properties of Borwein integrals is related to the Fourier transform of Sinc function FourierTransform[Sinc[x], x, k] 1/2 Sqrt[Pi/2] (Sign[1 - k] + Sign[1 + k]) Plot[%, {k, -2, 2}, Filling -> 0] which is the box function. The result is $\pi/2$ while the sum $$ 1/3+1/5+\dots+1/n $$ B_n = \frac{\pi}{2} - \pi \bigg(\sum_{k=3,5,\ldots}^n\frac{1}{k} -1\biggr)^\frac{n-1}{2}\prod_{k=3,5,\dots}^n\frac{k}{k-1}. $$ For $n=15$ it is equal to $$ \frac{46780...
Post a Comment
Read more

list manipulation - Selecting multiple columns from a matrix?

Sample data: data = { {{2013, 1, 1}, 24.13, 167.67, 231.82}, {{2013, 1, 2}, 32.15, 170.92, 225.99}, {{2013, 1, 3}, 35.43, 172.68, 221.67}, {{2013, 1, 4}, 36.73, 173.05, 218.32}, {{2013, 1, 5}, 58.19, 165.96, 197.05}, {{2013, 1, 6}, 69.99, 163.50, 187.52}, {{2013, 1, 7}, 71.37, 154.21, 175.58}, {{2013, 1, 8}, 72.51, 149.66, 163.25}}; I want a DateListPlot with three graphs, so for a matrix formed by columns 1 and 2, one for columns 1 and 3, and 1 for columns 1 and 4. At the moment I'm using this code: data2 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 2]]}]; data3 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 3]]}]; data4 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 4]]}]; DateListPlot[{data2, data3, data4}, Joined -> True, Filling -> {3 -> {1}}] but I have a hunch that this can be done more efficiently. I don't like the Transpose s in particular. Any ideas? edit (for extra credit) What if I need to multiply the second column by 2, which in my solution is simp...
Post a Comment
Read more