Computational Physics Lectures: Partial differential equations
Morten Hjorth-Jensen [1, 2]
[1] Department of Physics, University of Oslo
[2] Department of Physics and Astronomy and National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory, Michigan State University
Nov 19, 2020
Famous PDEs
In the Natural Sciences we often encounter problems with many variables
constrained by boundary conditions and initial values. Many of these problems
can be modelled as partial differential equations. One case which arises
in many situations is the so-called wave equation whose one-dimensional form
reads
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:waveeqpde}
\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}=A\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial t^2},
\end{equation}
$$
where \( A \) is a constant. The solution \( u \) depends on both spatial and temporal variables, viz. \( u=u(x,t) \).
Famous PDEs, two dimension
In two dimension we have \( u=u(x,y,t) \). We will, unless otherwise stated, simply use \( u \) in our discussion below.
Familiar situations which this equation can model
are waves on a string, pressure waves, waves on the surface of a fjord or a
lake, electromagnetic waves and sound waves to mention a few. For e.g., electromagnetic
waves we have the constant \( A=c^2 \), with \( c \) the speed of light. It is rather
straightforward to extend this equation to two or three dimension. In two dimensions
we have
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial y^2}=A\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial t^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
Famous PDEs, diffusion equation
The diffusion equation whose one-dimensional version reads
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:diffusionpde}
\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}=A\frac{\partial u}{\partial t},
\end{equation}
$$
and \( A \) is in this case called the diffusion constant. It can be used to model
a wide selection of diffusion processes, from molecules to the diffusion of heat
in a given material.
Famous PDEs, Laplace's equation
Another familiar equation from electrostatics is Laplace's equation, which looks similar
to the wave equation in Eq. \eqref{eq:waveeqpde} except that we have set \( A=0 \)
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:laplacepde}
\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial y^2}=0,
\end{equation}
$$
or if we have a finite electric charge represented by a charge density
\( \rho(\mathbf{x}) \) we have the familiar Poisson equation
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:poissonpde}
\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial y^2}=-4\pi \rho(\mathbf{x}).
\end{equation}
$$
Famous PDEs, Helmholtz' equation
Other famous partial differential equations are the Helmholtz (or eigenvalue) equation, here specialized to two
dimensions only
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:helmholtz}
-\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}-\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial y^2}=\lambda u,
\end{equation}
$$
the linear transport equation (in \( 2+1 \) dimensions) familiar from Brownian motion as well
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:transport}
\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} +\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial y }=0,
\end{equation}
$$
Famous PDEs, Schroedinger's equation in two dimensions
Schroedinger's equation
$$
\begin{equation*}
-\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}-\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial y^2}+f(x,y)u = \imath\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Famous PDEs, Maxwell's equations
Important systems of linear partial differential equations are the famous Maxwell equations
$$
\frac{\partial \mathbf{E}}{\partial t} = \mathrm{curl}\mathbf{B},
$$
and
$$
-\mathrm{curl} \mathbf{E} = \mathbf{B}
$$
and
$$
\mathrm{div} \mathbf{E} = \mathrm{div}\mathbf{B} = 0.
$$
Famous PDEs, Euler's equations
Similarly, famous systems of non-linear partial differential equations are for example Euler's equations for
incompressible, inviscid flow
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial \mathbf{u}}{\partial t} +\mathbf{u}\nabla\mathbf{u}= -Dp; \hspace{1cm} \mathrm{div} \mathbf{u} = 0,
\end{equation*}
$$
with \( p \) being the pressure and
$$
\begin{equation*}
\nabla = \frac{\partial}{\partial x}e_x+\frac{\partial}{\partial y}e_y,
\end{equation*}
$$
in the two dimensions. The unit vectors are \( e_x \) and \( e_y \).
Famous PDEs, the Navier-Stokes' equations
Another example is the set of
Navier-Stokes equations for incompressible, viscous flow
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial \mathbf{u}}{\partial t} +\mathbf{u}\nabla\mathbf{u}-\Delta \mathbf{u}= -Dp; \hspace{1cm} \mathrm{div} \mathbf{u} = 0.
\end{equation*}
$$
Famous PDEs, general equation in two dimensions
A general partial differential equation with two given dimensions
reads
$$
\begin{equation*}
A(x,y)\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}+B(x,y)\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x\partial y}
+C(x,y)\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial y^2}=F(x,y,u,\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}, \frac{\partial u}{\partial y}),
\end{equation*}
$$
and if we set
$$
\begin{equation*}
B=C=0,
\end{equation*}
$$
we recover the \( 1+1 \)-dimensional diffusion equation which is an example
of a so-called parabolic partial differential equation.
With
$$
\begin{equation*}
B=0, \hspace{1cm} AC < 0
\end{equation*}
$$
we get the \( 2+1 \)-dim wave equation which is an example of a so-called
elliptic PDE, where more generally we have
\( B^2 > AC \).
For \( B^2 < AC \)
we obtain a so-called hyperbolic PDE, with the Laplace equation in
Eq. \eqref{eq:laplacepde} as one of the
classical examples.

Diffusion equation
The diffusion equation describes in typical applications the evolution in time of the density \( u \) of a quantity like
the particle density, energy density, temperature gradient, chemical concentrations etc.
The basis is the assumption that the flux density \( \mathbf{\rho} \) obeys the Gauss-Green theorem
$$
\begin{equation*}
\int_V \mathrm{div}\mathbf{\rho} dx = \int_{\partial V} \mathbf{\rho}\mathbf{n}dS,
\end{equation*}
$$
where \( n \) is the unit outer normal field and \( V \) is a smooth region with the space where
we seek a solution.
The Gauss-Green theorem leads to
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{div} \mathbf{\rho} = 0.
\end{equation*}
$$
Diffusion equation
Assuming that the flux is proportional to the gradient \( \mathbf{\nabla} u \) but pointing in the opposite direction
since the flow is from regions of high concetration to lower concentrations, we obtain
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{\rho} = -D\mathbf{\nabla} u,
\end{equation*}
$$
resulting in
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{div} \mathbf{\nabla} u = D\Delta u = 0,
\end{equation*}
$$
which is Laplace's equation. The constant \( D \) can be coupled with various physical
constants, such as the diffusion constant or the specific heat and thermal conductivity discussed below.
Diffusion equation, famous laws
If we let \( u \) denote the concetration of a particle species, this results in Fick's law of diffusion.
If it denotes the temperature gradient, we have Fourier'slaw of heat conduction and if it refers to the
electrostatic potential we have Ohm's law of electrical conduction.
Coupling the rate of change (temporal dependence) of \( u \) with the flux density we have
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} = -\mathrm{div}\mathbf{\rho},
\end{equation*}
$$
which results in
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}= D \mathrm{div} \mathbf{\nabla} u = D \Delta u,
\end{equation*}
$$
the diffusion equation, or heat equation.
Diffusion equation, heat equation
If we specialize to the heat equation,
we assume that the diffusion of heat through some
material is proportional with the temperature gradient \( T(\mathbf{x},t) \)
and using
conservation of energy we arrive at the diffusion equation
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\kappa}{C\rho}\nabla^2 T(\mathbf{x},t) =\frac{\partial T(\mathbf{x},t)}{\partial t}
\end{equation*}
$$
where \( C \) is the specific heat and \( \rho \)
the density of the material.
Here we let the density be represented by a
constant, but there is no problem introducing an explicit spatial dependence, viz.,
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\kappa}{C\rho(\mathbf{x},t)}\nabla^2 T(\mathbf{x},t) =
\frac{\partial T(\mathbf{x},t)}{\partial t}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Diffusion equation, heat equation in one dimension
Setting all constants equal to the diffusion constant \( D \), i.e.,
$$
\begin{equation*}
D=\frac{C\rho}{\kappa},
\end{equation*}
$$
we arrive at
$$
\begin{equation*}
\nabla^2 T(\mathbf{x},t) =
D\frac{\partial T(\mathbf{x},t)}{\partial t}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Specializing to the \( 1+1 \)-dimensional case we have
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial^2 T(x,t)}{\partial x^2}=D\frac{\partial T(x,t)}{\partial t}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Diffusion equation, dimensionless form
We note that the dimension of \( D \) is time/length$^2$.
Introducing the dimensionless variables \( \alpha\hat{x}=x \)
we get
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial^2 T(x,t)}{\alpha^2\partial \hat{x}^2}=
D\frac{\partial T(x,t)}{\partial t},
\end{equation*}
$$
and since \( \alpha \) is just a constant we could define
\( \alpha^2D= 1 \) or use the last expression to define a dimensionless time-variable
\( \hat{t} \). This yields a simplified diffusion equation
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial^2 T(\hat{x},\hat{t})}{\partial \hat{x}^2}=
\frac{\partial T(\hat{x},\hat{t})}{\partial \hat{t}}.
\end{equation*}
$$
It is now a partial differential equation in terms of dimensionless
variables. In the discussion below, we will however, for the sake
of notational simplicity replace \( \hat{x}\rightarrow x \) and
\( \hat{t}\rightarrow t \). Moreover, the solution to the \( 1+1 \)-dimensional
partial differential equation is replaced by \( T(\hat{x},\hat{t})\rightarrow u(x,t) \).
Explicit Scheme
In one dimension we have the following equation
$$
\begin{equation*}
\nabla^2 u(x,t) =\frac{\partial u(x,t)}{\partial t},
\end{equation*}
$$
or
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx} = u_t,
\end{equation*}
$$
with initial conditions, i.e., the conditions at \( t=0 \),
$$
\begin{equation*}
u(x,0)= g(x) \hspace{0.5cm} 0 < x < L
\end{equation*}
$$
with \( L=1 \) the length of the \( x \)-region of interest.
Explicit Scheme, boundary conditions
The boundary conditions are
$$
\begin{equation*}
u(0,t)= a(t) \hspace{0.5cm} t \ge 0,
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
u(L,t)= b(t) \hspace{0.5cm} t \ge 0,
\end{equation*}
$$
where \( a(t) \) and \( b(t) \) are two functions which depend on time only, while
\( g(x) \) depends only on the position \( x \).
Our next step is to find a numerical algorithm for solving this equation. Here we recur
to our familiar equal-step methods
and introduce different step lengths for the space-variable \( x \) and time \( t \) through
the step length for \( x \)
$$
\begin{equation*}
\Delta x=\frac{1}{n+1}
\end{equation*}
$$
and the time step length \( \Delta t \). The position after \( i \) steps and
time at time-step \( j \) are now given by
$$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{cc} t_j=j\Delta t & j \ge 0 \\
x_i=i\Delta x & 0 \le i \le n+1\end{array}
\end{equation*}
$$
Explicit Scheme, algorithm
If we use standard approximations for the derivatives we obtain
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_t\approx \frac{u(x,t+\Delta t)-u(x,t)}{\Delta t}=\frac{u(x_i,t_j+\Delta t)-u(x_i,t_j)}{\Delta t}
\end{equation*}
$$
with a local approximation error \( O(\Delta t) \)
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u(x+\Delta x,t)-2u(x,t)+u(x-\Delta x,t)}{\Delta x^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
or
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u(x_i+\Delta x,t_j)-2u(x_i,t_j)+u(x_i-\Delta x,t_j)}{\Delta x^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
with a local approximation error \( O(\Delta x^2) \). Our approximation is to higher order
in coordinate space. This can be justified since in most cases it is the spatial
dependence which causes numerical problems.
Explicit Scheme, simplifications
These equations can be further simplified as
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_t\approx \frac{u_{i,j+1}-u_{i,j}}{\Delta t},
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u_{i+1,j}-2u_{i,j}+u_{i-1,j}}{\Delta x^2}.
\end{equation*}
$$
The one-dimensional diffusion equation can then be rewritten in its
discretized version as
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{u_{i,j+1}-u_{i,j}}{\Delta t}=\frac{u_{i+1,j}-2u_{i,j}+u_{i-1,j}}{\Delta x^2}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Defining \( \alpha = \Delta t/\Delta x^2 \) results in the explicit scheme
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:explicitpde}
u_{i,j+1}= \alpha u_{i-1,j}+(1-2\alpha)u_{i,j}+\alpha u_{i+1,j}.
\end{equation}
$$
Explicit Scheme, solving the equations
Since all the discretized initial values
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{i,0} = g(x_i),
\end{equation*}
$$
are known, then after one time-step the only unknown quantity is
\( u_{i,1} \) which is given by
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{i,1}= \alpha u_{i-1,0}+(1-2\alpha)u_{i,0}+\alpha u_{i+1,0}=
\alpha g(x_{i-1})+(1-2\alpha)g(x_{i})+\alpha g(x_{i+1}).
\end{equation*}
$$
We can then obtain \( u_{i,2} \) using the previously calculated values \( u_{i,1} \)
and the boundary conditions \( a(t) \) and \( b(t) \).
This algorithm results in a so-called explicit scheme, since the next functions
\( u_{i,j+1} \) are explicitely given by Eq. \eqref{eq:explicitpde}.
Explicit Scheme, simple case
We specialize to the case
\( a(t)=b(t)=0 \) which results in \( u_{0,j}=u_{n+1,j}=0 \).
We can then reformulate our partial differential equation through the vector
\( V_j \) at the time \( t_j=j\Delta t \)
$$
\begin{equation*}
V_j=\begin{bmatrix}u_{1,j}\\ u_{2,j} \\ \dots \\ u_{n,j}\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Explicit Scheme, matrix-vector formulation
This results in a matrix-vector multiplication
$$
\begin{equation*}
V_{j+1} = \mathbf{A}V_{j}
\end{equation*}
$$
with the matrix \( \mathbf{A} \) given by
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{A}=\begin{bmatrix}1-2\alpha&\alpha&0& 0\dots\\
\alpha&1-2\alpha&\alpha & 0\dots \\
\dots & \dots & \dots & \dots \\
0\dots & 0\dots &\alpha& 1-2\alpha\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation*}
$$
which means we can rewrite the original partial differential equation as
a set of matrix-vector multiplications
$$
\begin{equation*}
V_{j+1} = \mathbf{A}V_{j}=\dots = \mathbf{A}^{j+1}V_0,
\end{equation*}
$$
where \( V_0 \) is the initial vector at time \( t=0 \) defined by the initial value
\( g(x) \).
In the numerical implementation
one should avoid to treat this problem as a matrix vector multiplication
since the matrix is triangular and at most three elements in each row are different from zero.
Explicit Scheme, sketch of code
It is rather easy to implement this matrix-vector multiplication as seen in the following piece of code
// First we set initialise the new and old vectors
// Here we have chosen the boundary conditions to be zero.
// n+1 is the number of mesh points in x
// Armadillo notation for vectors
u(0) = unew(0) = u(n) = unew(n) = 0.0;
for (int i = 1; i < n; i++) {
x = i*step;
// initial condition
u(i) = func(x);
// intitialise the new vector
unew(i) = 0;
}
// Time integration
for (int t = 1; t <= tsteps; t++) {
for (int i = 1; i < n; i++) {
// Discretized diff eq
unew(i) = alpha * u(i-1) + (1 - 2*alpha) * u(i) + alpha * u(i+1);
}
// note that the boundaries are not changed.
Explicit Scheme, stability condition
However, although the explicit scheme is easy to implement, it has a very weak
stability condition, given by
$$
\begin{equation*}
\Delta t/\Delta x^2 \le 1/2.
\end{equation*}
$$
This means that if \( \Delta x = 0.01 \) (a rather frequent choice), then \( \Delta t= 5\times 10^{-5} \). This has obviously
bad consequences if our time interval is large.
In order to derive this relation we need some results from studies of iterative schemes.
If we require that our solution approaches a definite value after
a certain amount of time steps we need to require that the so-called
spectral radius \( \rho(\mathbf{A}) \) of our matrix \( \mathbf{A} \) satisfies the condition
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rhoconverge}
\rho(\mathbf{A}) < 1.
\end{equation}
$$
Explicit Scheme, spectral radius and stability
The spectral radius is defined
as
$$
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\mathbf{A}) = \hspace{0.1cm}\mathrm{max}\left\{|\lambda|:\mathrm{det}(\mathbf{A}-\lambda\hat{I})=0\right\},
\end{equation*}
$$
which is interpreted as the smallest number such that a circle with radius centered at zero in the complex plane
contains all eigenvalues of \( \mathbf{A} \). If the matrix is positive definite, the condition in
Eq. \eqref{eq:rhoconverge} is always satisfied.
Explicit Scheme, eigenvalues and stability
We can obtain closed-form expressions for the eigenvalues of \( \mathbf{A} \). To achieve this it is convenient
to rewrite the matrix as
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{A}=\hat{I}-\alpha\hat{B},
\end{equation*}
$$
with
$$
\begin{equation*}
\hat{B} =\begin{bmatrix}2&-1&0& 0 &\dots\\
-1&2&-1& 0&\dots \\
\dots & \dots & \dots & \dots & -1 \\
0 & 0 &\dots &-1&2\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Explicit Scheme, final stability analysis
The eigenvalues of \( \mathbf{A} \) are \( \lambda_i=1-\alpha\mu_i \), with \( \mu_i \) being the
eigenvalues of \( \hat{B} \). To find \( \mu_i \) we note that the matrix elements of \( \hat{B} \) are
$$
\begin{equation*}
b_{ij} = 2\delta_{ij}-\delta_{i+1j}-\delta_{i-1j},
\end{equation*}
$$
meaning that we
have the following set of eigenequations for component \( i \)
$$
\begin{equation*}
(\hat{B}\hat{x})_i = \mu_ix_i,
\end{equation*}
$$
resulting in
$$
\begin{equation*}
(\hat{B}\hat{x})_i=\sum_{j=1}^n\left(2\delta_{ij}-\delta_{i+1j}-\delta_{i-1j}\right)x_j =
2x_i-x_{i+1}-x_{i-1}=\mu_ix_i.
\end{equation*}
$$
Explicit Scheme, stability condition
If we assume that \( x \) can be expanded in a basis of \( x=(\sin{(\theta)}, \sin{(2\theta)},\dots, \sin{(n\theta)}) \)
with \( \theta = l\pi/n+1 \), where we have the endpoints given by \( x_0 = 0 \) and \( x_{n+1}=0 \), we can rewrite the
last equation as
$$
\begin{equation*}
2\sin{(i\theta)}-\sin{((i+1)\theta)}-\sin{((i-1)\theta)}=\mu_i\sin{(i\theta)},
\end{equation*}
$$
or
$$
\begin{equation*}
2\left(1-\cos{(\theta)}\right)\sin{(i\theta)}=\mu_i\sin{(i\theta)},
\end{equation*}
$$
which is nothing but
$$
\begin{equation*}
2\left(1-\cos{(\theta)}\right)x_i=\mu_ix_i,
\end{equation*}
$$
with eigenvalues \( \mu_i = 2-2\cos{(\theta)} \).
Our requirement in
Eq. \eqref{eq:rhoconverge} results in
$$
\begin{equation*}
-1 < 1-\alpha2\left(1-\cos{(\theta)}\right) < 1,
\end{equation*}
$$
which is satisfied only if \( \alpha < \left(1-\cos{(\theta)}\right)^{-1} \) resulting in
\( \alpha \le 1/2 \) or \( \Delta t/\Delta x^2 \le 1/2 \).
Explicit Scheme, general tridiagonal matrix
A more general tridiagonal matrix
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{A} =\begin{bmatrix}a&b&0& 0 &\dots\\
c&a&b& 0&\dots \\
\dots & \dots & \dots & \dots & b \\
0 & 0 &\dots &c&a\end{bmatrix},
\end{equation*}
$$
has eigenvalues \( \mu_i=a+s\sqrt{bc}\cos{(i\pi/n+1)} \) with \( i=1:n \).
Implicit Scheme
In deriving the equations for the explicit scheme we started with the so-called
forward formula for the first derivative, i.e., we used the discrete approximation
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_t\approx \frac{u(x_i,t_j+\Delta t)-u(x_i,t_j)}{\Delta t}.
\end{equation*}
$$
However, there is nothing which hinders us from using the backward formula
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_t\approx \frac{u(x_i,t_j)-u(x_i,t_j-\Delta t)}{\Delta t},
\end{equation*}
$$
still with a truncation error which goes like \( O(\Delta t) \).
Implicit Scheme
We could also have used a midpoint approximation for the first derivative, resulting in
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_t\approx \frac{u(x_i,t_j+\Delta t)-u(x_i,t_j-\Delta t)}{2\Delta t},
\end{equation*}
$$
with a truncation error \( O(\Delta t^2) \).
Here we will stick to the backward formula and come back to the latter below.
For the second derivative we use however
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u(x_i+\Delta x,t_j)-2u(x_i,t_j)+u(x_i-\Delta x,t_j)}{\Delta x^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
and define again \( \alpha = \Delta t/\Delta x^2 \).
Implicit Scheme
We obtain now
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{i,j-1}= -\alpha u_{i-1,j}+(1-2\alpha)u_{i,j}-\alpha u_{i+1,j}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Here \( u_{i,j-1} \) is the only unknown quantity.
Defining the matrix
\( \mathbf{A} \)
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{A}=\begin{bmatrix}1+2\alpha&-\alpha&0& 0 &\dots\\
-\alpha&1+2\alpha&-\alpha & 0 & \dots \\
\dots & \dots & \dots & \dots &\dots \\
\dots & \dots & \dots & \dots & -\alpha \\
0 & 0 &\dots &-\alpha& 1+2\alpha\end{bmatrix},
\end{equation*}
$$
we can reformulate again the problem as a matrix-vector multiplication
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{A}V_{j} = V_{j-1}
\end{equation*}
$$
Implicit Scheme
It means that we can rewrite the problem as
$$
\begin{equation*}
V_{j} = \mathbf{A}^{-1}V_{j-1}=\mathbf{A}^{-1}\left(\mathbf{A}^{-1}V_{j-2}\right)=\dots = \mathbf{A}^{-j}V_0.
\end{equation*}
$$
This is an implicit scheme since it relies on determining the vector
\( u_{i,j-1} \) instead of \( u_{i,j+1} \).
If \( \alpha \) does not depend on time \( t \), we need
to invert a matrix only once. Alternatively we can solve this system of equations using our methods
from linear algebra.
These are however very cumbersome ways of solving since they involve \( \sim O(N^3) \) operations
for a \( N\times N \) matrix.
It is much faster to solve these linear equations using methods for tridiagonal matrices,
since these involve only \( \sim O(N) \) operations.
Implicit Scheme
The implicit scheme is always stable since the spectral radius satisfies \( \rho(\mathbf{A}) < 1 \). We could have inferred this by noting that
the matrix is positive definite, viz. all eigenvalues are larger than zero. We see this from
the fact that \( \mathbf{A}=\hat{I}+\alpha\hat{B} \) has eigenvalues
\( \lambda_i = 1+\alpha(2-2cos(\theta)) \) which satisfy \( \lambda_i > 1 \). Since it is the inverse which stands
to the right of our iterative equation, we have \( \rho(\mathbf{A}^{-1}) < 1 \)
and the method is stable for all combinations
of \( \Delta t \) and \( \Delta x \).
Program Example for Implicit Equation
We show here parts of a simple example of how to solve the one-dimensional diffusion equation using the implicit
scheme discussed above. The program uses the function to solve linear equations with a tridiagonal
matrix.
// parts of the function for backward Euler
void backward_euler(int n, int tsteps, double delta_x, double alpha)
{
double a, b, c;
vec u(n+1); // This is u of Au = y
vec y(n+1); // Right side of matrix equation Au=y, the solution at a previous step
// Initial conditions
for (int i = 1; i < n; i++) {
y(i) = u(i) = func(delta_x*i);
}
// Boundary conditions (zero here)
y(n) = u(n) = u(0) = y(0);
// Matrix A, only constants
a = c = - alpha;
b = 1 + 2*alpha;
// Time iteration
for (int t = 1; t <= tsteps; t++) {
// here we solve the tridiagonal linear set of equations,
tridag(a, b, c, y, u, n+1);
// boundary conditions
u(0) = 0;
u(n) = 0;
// replace previous time solution with new
for (int i = 0; i <= n; i++) {
y(i) = u(i);
}
// You may consider printing the solution at regular time intervals
.... // print statements
} // end time iteration
...
}
Crank-Nicolson scheme
It is possible to combine the implicit and explicit methods in a slightly more general
approach. Introducing a parameter \( \theta \) (the so-called \( \theta \)-rule) we can set up
an equation
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cranknicolson}
\frac{\theta}{\Delta x^2}\left(u_{i-1,j}-2u_{i,j}+u_{i+1,j}\right)+
\frac{1-\theta}{\Delta x^2}\left(u_{i+1,j-1}-2u_{i,j-1}+u_{i-1,j-1}\right)=
\frac{1}{\Delta t}\left(u_{i,j}-u_{i,j-1}\right),
\end{equation}
$$
which for \( \theta=0 \) yields the forward formula for the first derivative and
the explicit scheme, while \( \theta=1 \) yields the backward formula and the implicit
scheme. These two schemes are called the backward and forward Euler schemes, respectively.
For \( \theta = 1/2 \) we obtain a new scheme after its inventors, Crank and Nicolson.
This scheme yields a truncation in time which goes like \( O(\Delta t^2) \) and it is stable
for all possible combinations of \( \Delta t \) and \( \Delta x \).
Derivation of CN scheme
To derive the Crank-Nicolson equation,
we start with the forward Euler scheme and Taylor expand \( u(x,t+\Delta t) \),
\( u(x+\Delta x, t) \) and \( u(x-\Delta x,t) \)
$$
\begin{align}
u(x+\Delta x,t)&=u(x,t)+\frac{\partial u(x,t)}{\partial x} \Delta x+\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t)}{2\partial x^2}\Delta x^2+\mathcal{O}(\Delta x^3),
\label{_auto1}\\ \nonumber
u(x-\Delta x,t)&=u(x,t)-\frac{\partial u(x,t)}{\partial x}\Delta x+\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t)}{2\partial x^2} \Delta x^2+\mathcal{O}(\Delta x^3),\\ \nonumber
u(x,t+\Delta t)&=u(x,t)+\frac{\partial u(x,t)}{\partial t}\Delta t+ \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^2).
\label{eq:deltat0}
\end{align}
$$
Taylor expansions
With these Taylor expansions the approximations for the derivatives takes the form
$$
\begin{align}
&\left[\frac{\partial u(x,t)}{\partial t}\right]_{\text{approx}} =\frac{\partial u(x,t)}{\partial t}+\mathcal{O}(\Delta t) ,
\label{_auto2}\\ \nonumber
&\left[\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t)}{\partial x^2}\right]_{\text{approx}}=\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t)}{\partial x^2}+\mathcal{O}(\Delta x^2).
\end{align}
$$
It is easy to convince oneself that the backward Euler method must have the same truncation errors as the forward Euler scheme.
Error in CN scheme
For the Crank-Nicolson scheme we also need to Taylor expand \( u(x+\Delta x, t+\Delta t) \) and \( u(x-\Delta x, t+\Delta t) \) around \( t'=t+\Delta t/2 \).
$$
\begin{align}
u(x+\Delta x, t+\Delta t)&=u(x,t')+\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial x}\Delta x+\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial t} \frac{\Delta t}{2} +\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{2\partial x^2}\Delta x^2+\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{2\partial t^2}\frac{\Delta t^2}{4} +\notag
\label{_auto3}\\ \nonumber
&\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{\partial x\partial t}\frac{\Delta t}{2} \Delta x+ \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^3)\\ \nonumber
u(x-\Delta x, t+\Delta t)&=u(x,t')-\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial x}\Delta x+\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial t} \frac{\Delta t}{2} +\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{2\partial x^2}\Delta x^2+\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{2\partial t^2}\frac{\Delta t^2}{4} - \notag\\ \nonumber
&\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{\partial x\partial t}\frac{\Delta t}{2} \Delta x+ \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^3)\\
u(x+\Delta x,t)&=u(x,t')+\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial x}\Delta x-\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial t} \frac{\Delta t}{2} +\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{2\partial x^2}\Delta x^2+\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{2\partial t^2}\frac{\Delta t^2}{4} -\notag
\label{_auto4}\\ \nonumber
&\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{\partial x\partial t}\frac{\Delta t}{2} \Delta x+ \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^3)\\ \nonumber
u(x-\Delta x,t)&=u(x,t')-\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial x}\Delta x-\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial t} \frac{\Delta t}{2} +\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{2\partial x^2}\Delta x^2+\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{2\partial t^2}\frac{\Delta t^2}{4} +\notag \\ \nonumber
&\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{\partial x\partial t}\frac{\Delta t}{2} \Delta x+ \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^3)\\ \nonumber
u(x,t+\Delta t)&=u(x,t')+\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial t}\frac{\Delta_t}{2} +\frac{\partial ^2 u(x,t')}{2\partial t^2}\Delta t^2 + \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^3)\\ \nonumber
u(x,t)&=u(x,t')-\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial t}\frac{\Delta t}{2}+\frac{\partial ^2 u(x,t')}{2\partial t^2}\Delta t^2 + \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^3)
\label{eq:deltat}
\end{align}
$$
We now insert these expansions in the approximations for the derivatives to find
$$
\begin{align}
&\left[\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial t}\right]_{\text{approx}} =\frac{\partial u(x,t')}{\partial t}+\mathcal{O}(\Delta t^2) ,
\label{_auto5}\\ \nonumber
&\left[\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{\partial x^2}\right]_{\text{approx}}=\frac{\partial^2 u(x,t')}{\partial x^2}+\mathcal{O}(\Delta x^2).
\end{align}
$$
Truncation errors and stability
The following table summarizes the three methods.
| Scheme: | Truncation Error: | Stability requirements: |
| Crank-Nicolson | \( \mathcal{O}(\Delta x^2) \) and \( \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^2) \) | Stable for all \( \Delta t \) and \( \Delta x \). |
| Backward Euler | \( \mathcal{O}(\Delta x^2) \) and \( \mathcal{O}(\Delta t) \) | Stable for all \( \Delta t \) and \( \Delta x \). |
| Forward Euler | \( \mathcal{O}(\Delta x^2) \) and \( \mathcal{O}(\Delta t) \) | \( \Delta t\leq \frac{1}{2}\Delta x^2 \) |
Rewrite of CN scheme
Using our previous definition of \( \alpha=\Delta t/\Delta x^2 \) we can rewrite Eq. \eqref{eq:cranknicolson} as
$$
\begin{equation*}
-\alpha u_{i-1,j}+\left(2+2\alpha\right)u_{i,j}-\alpha u_{i+1,j}=
\alpha u_{i-1,j-1}+\left(2-2\alpha\right)u_{i,j-1}+\alpha u_{i+1,j-1},
\end{equation*}
$$
or in matrix-vector form as
$$
\begin{equation*}
\left(2\hat{I}+\alpha\hat{B}\right)V_{j}=
\left(2\hat{I}-\alpha\hat{B}\right)V_{j-1},
\end{equation*}
$$
where the vector \( V_{j} \) is the same as defined in the implicit case while the matrix
\( \hat{B} \) is
$$
\begin{equation*}
\hat{B}=\begin{bmatrix}2&-1&0&0 & \dots\\
-1& 2& -1 & 0 &\dots \\
\dots & \dots & \dots & \dots & \dots \\
\dots & \dots & \dots & \dots &-1 \\
0& 0 & \dots &-1& 2\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Final CN equations
We can rewrite the Crank-Nicolson scheme as follows
$$
\begin{equation*}
V_{j}=
\left(2\hat{I}+\alpha\hat{B}\right)^{-1}\left(2\hat{I}-\alpha\hat{B}\right)V_{j-1}.
\end{equation*}
$$
We have already obtained the eigenvalues for the two matrices
\( \left(2\hat{I}+\alpha\hat{B}\right) \) and \( \left(2\hat{I}-\alpha\hat{B}\right) \).
This means that the spectral function has to satisfy
$$
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\left(2\hat{I}+\alpha\hat{B}\right)^{-1}\left(2\hat{I}-\alpha\hat{B}\right)) < 1,
\end{equation*}
$$
meaning that
$$
\begin{equation*}
\left|(\left(2+\alpha\mu_i\right)^{-1}\left(2-\alpha\mu_i\right)\right| < 1,
\end{equation*}
$$
and since \( \mu_i = 2-2cos(\theta) \) we have \( 0 < \mu_i < 4 \). A little algebra shows that
the algorithm is stable for all possible values of \( \Delta t \) and \( \Delta x \).
Parts of Code for the Crank-Nicolson Scheme
We can code in an efficient way the Crank-Nicolson algortihm by first multplying the matrix
$$
\begin{equation*}
\tilde{V}_{j-1}=\left(2\hat{I}-\alpha\hat{B}\right)V_{j-1},
\end{equation*}
$$
with our previous vector \( V_{j-1} \) using the matrix-vector multiplication algorithm for a
tridiagonal matrix, as done in the forward-Euler scheme. Thereafter we can solve the equation
$$
\begin{equation*}
\left(2\hat{I}+\alpha\hat{B}\right) V_{j}=
\tilde{V}_{j-1},
\end{equation*}
$$
using our method for systems of linear equations with a tridiagonal matrix, as done for the backward Euler scheme.
Parts of Code for the Crank-Nicolson Scheme
We illustrate this in the following part of our program.
void crank_nicolson(int n, int tsteps, double delta_x, double alpha)
{
double a, b, c;
vec u(n+1); // This is u in Au = r
vec r(n+1); // Right side of matrix equation Au=r
....
// setting up the matrix
a = c = - alpha;
b = 2 + 2*alpha;
// Time iteration
for (int t = 1; t <= tsteps; t++) {
// Calculate r for use in tridag, right hand side of the Crank Nicolson method
for (int i = 1; i < n; i++) {
r(i) = alpha*u(i-1) + (2 - 2*alpha)*u(i) + alpha*u(i+1);
}
r(0) = 0;
r(n) = 0;
// Then solve the tridiagonal matrix
tridiag(a, b, c, r, u, xsteps+1);
u(0) = 0;
u(n) = 0;
// Eventual print statements etc
....
}
Python code for solving the one-dimensional diffusion equation
The following Python code sets up and solves the diffusion equation for all three methods discussed.
Solution for the One-dimensional Diffusion Equation
It cannot be repeated enough, it is always useful to find cases where one can compare the numerical results
and the developed algorithms and codes with closed-form solutions.
The above case is also particularly simple.
We have the following partial differential equation
$$
\begin{equation*}
\nabla^2 u(x,t) =\frac{\partial u(x,t)}{\partial t},
\end{equation*}
$$
with initial conditions
$$
\begin{equation*}
u(x,0)= g(x) \hspace{0.5cm} 0 < x < L.
\end{equation*}
$$
Solution for the One-dimensional Diffusion Equation
The boundary conditions are
$$
\begin{equation*}
u(0,t)= 0 \hspace{0.5cm} t \ge 0, \hspace{1cm} u(L,t)= 0 \hspace{0.5cm} t \ge 0,
\end{equation*}
$$
We assume that we have solutions of the form (separation of variable)
$$
\begin{equation*}
u(x,t)=F(x)G(t).
\end{equation*}
$$
which inserted in the partial differential equation results in
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{F''}{F}=\frac{G'}{G},
\end{equation*}
$$
where the derivative is with respect to \( x \) on the left hand side and with respect to \( t \) on right hand side.
This equation should hold for all \( x \) and \( t \). We must require the rhs and lhs to be equal to a constant.
Solution for the One-dimensional Diffusion Equation
We call this constant \( -\lambda^2 \). This gives us the two differential equations,
$$
\begin{equation*}
F''+\lambda^2F=0; \hspace{1cm} G'=-\lambda^2G,
\end{equation*}
$$
with general solutions
$$
\begin{equation*}
F(x)=A\sin(\lambda x)+B\cos(\lambda x); \hspace{1cm} G(t)=Ce^{-\lambda^2t}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Solution for the One-dimensional Diffusion Equation
To satisfy the boundary conditions we require \( B=0 \) and \( \lambda=n\pi/L \). One solution is therefore found to be
$$
\begin{equation*}
u(x,t)=A_n\sin(n\pi x/L)e^{-n^2\pi^2 t/L^2}.
\end{equation*}
$$
But there are infinitely many possible \( n \) values (infinite number of solutions). Moreover,
the diffusion equation is linear and because of this we know that a superposition of solutions
will also be a solution of the equation. We may therefore write
$$
\begin{equation*}
u(x,t)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} A_n \sin(n\pi x/L) e^{-n^2\pi^2 t/L^2}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Solution for the One-dimensional Diffusion Equation
The coefficient \( A_n \) is in turn determined from the initial condition. We require
$$
\begin{equation*}
u(x,0)=g(x)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} A_n \sin(n\pi x/L).
\end{equation*}
$$
The coefficient \( A_n \) is the Fourier coefficients for the function \( g(x) \). Because of this, \( A_n \) is given by (from the theory on Fourier series)
$$
\begin{equation*}
A_n=\frac{2}{L}\int_0^L g(x)\sin(n\pi x/L) \mathrm{d}x.
\end{equation*}
$$
Different \( g(x) \) functions will obviously result in different results for \( A_n \).
Explict scheme for the diffusion equation in two dimensions
The \( 2+1 \)-dimensional diffusion equation, with the diffusion constant \( D=1 \), is given by
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}=\left(\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial y^2}\right),
\end{equation*}
$$
where we have \( u=u(x,y,t) \).
We assume that we have a square lattice of length \( L \) with equally
many mesh points in the \( x \) and \( y \) directions.
We discretize again position and time using now
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u(x+h,y,t)-2u(x,y,t)+u(x-h,y,t)}{h^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
which we rewrite as, in its discretized version,
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u^{l}_{i+1,j}-2u^{l}_{i,j}+u^{l}_{i-1,j}}{h^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
where \( x_i=x_0+ih \), \( y_j=y_0+jh \) and \( t_l=t_0+l\Delta t \), with \( h=L/(n+1) \) and \( \Delta t \) the time step.
Explict scheme for the diffusion equation in two dimensions
We have defined our domain to start \( x(y)=0 \) and end at \( X(y)=L \).
The second derivative with respect to \( y \) reads
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{yy}\approx \frac{u^{l}_{i,j+1}-2u^{l}_{i,j}+u^{l}_{i,j-1}}{h^2}.
\end{equation*}
$$
We use again the so-called forward-going Euler formula for the first derivative in time. In its discretized form we have
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{t}\approx \frac{u^{l+1}_{i,j}-u^{l}_{i,j}}{\Delta t},
\end{equation*}
$$
resulting in
$$
\begin{equation*}
u^{l+1}_{i,j}= u^{l}_{i,j} + \alpha\left[u^{l}_{i+1,j}+u^{l}_{i-1,j}+u^{l}_{i,j+1}+u^{l}_{i,j-1}-4u^{l}_{i,j}\right],
\end{equation*}
$$
where the left hand side, with the solution at the new time step, is the only unknown term, since starting with \( t=t_0 \), the right hand side is entirely
determined by the boundary and initial conditions. We have \( \alpha=\Delta t/h^2 \).
This scheme can be implemented using essentially the same approach as we used in Eq. \eqref{eq:explicitpde}.
Laplace's and Poisson's Equations
Laplace's equation reads
$$
\begin{equation*}
\nabla^2 u(\mathbf{x})=u_{xx}+u_{yy}=0.
\end{equation*}
$$
with possible boundary conditions
\( u(x,y) = g(x,y) \) on the border \( \delta\Omega \). There is no time-dependence.
We seek a solution in the region \( \Omega \) and we choose a quadratic mesh
with equally many steps in both directions. We could choose the grid to be rectangular or following
polar coordinates \( r,\theta \) as well. Here we choose equal steps lengths in the \( x \) and
the \( y \) directions. We set
$$
\begin{equation*} h=\Delta x = \Delta y = \frac{L}{n+1},\end{equation*}
$$
where \( L \) is the length of the sides and we have \( n+1 \) points in both directions.
Laplace's and Poisson's Equations, discretized version
The discretized version reads
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u(x+h,y)-2u(x,y)+u(x-h,y)}{h^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{yy}\approx \frac{u(x,y+h)-2u(x,y)+u(x,y-h)}{h^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
which we rewrite as
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u_{i+1,j}-2u_{i,j}+u_{i-1,j}}{h^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{yy}\approx \frac{u_{i,j+1}-2u_{i,j}+u_{i,j-1}}{h^2}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Laplace's and Poisson's Equations, final discretized version
Inserting in Laplace's equation we obtain
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:laplacescheme}
u_{i,j}= \frac{1}{4}\left[u_{i,j+1}+u_{i,j-1}+u_{i+1,j}+u_{i-1,j}\right].
\end{equation}
$$
This is our final numerical scheme for solving Laplace's equation.
Poisson's equation adds only a minor complication
to the above equation since in this case we have
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}+u_{yy}=-\rho(x,y),
\end{equation*}
$$
and we need only to add a discretized version of \( \rho(\mathbf{x}) \)
resulting in
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:poissonscheme}
u_{i,j}= \frac{1}{4}\left[u_{i,j+1}+u_{i,j-1}+u_{i+1,j}+u_{i-1,j}\right]
+\frac{h^2}{4}\rho_{i,j}.
\end{equation}
$$
Laplace's and Poisson's Equations, boundary conditions
The boundary condtions read
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{i,0} = g_{i,0} \hspace{0.5cm} 0\le i \le n+1,
\end{equation*}
$$
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{i,L} = g_{i,0} \hspace{0.5cm} 0\le i \le n+1,
\end{equation*}
$$
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{0,j} = g_{0,j} \hspace{0.5cm} 0\le j \le n+1,
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{L,j} = g_{L,j} \hspace{0.5cm} 0\le j \le n+1.
\end{equation*}
$$
With \( n+1 \) mesh points the equations for \( u \) result in a system of \( (n+1)^2 \) linear equations in the \( (n+1)^2 \) unknown \( u_{i,j} \).
Scheme for solving Laplace's (Poisson's) equation
We rewrite Eq. \eqref{eq:poissonscheme}
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:poissonrewritten}
4u_{i,j}= \left[u_{i,j+1}+u_{i,j-1}+u_{i+1,j}+u_{i-1,j}\right]
-h^2\rho_{i,j}=\Delta_{ij}-\tilde{\rho}_{ij},
\end{equation}
$$
where we have defined
$$
\begin{equation*}
\Delta_{ij}= \left[u_{i,j+1}+u_{i,j-1}+u_{i+1,j}+u_{i-1,j}\right],
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
\tilde{\rho}_{ij}=h^2\rho_{i,j}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Scheme for solving Laplace's (Poisson's) equation
In order to illustrate how we can transform the last equations into a
linear algebra problem of the type \( \mathbf{A}\mathbf{x}=\mathbf{w} \), with
\( \mathbf{A} \) a matrix and \( \mathbf{x} \) and \( \mathbf{w} \) unknown and known
vectors respectively, let us also for the sake of simplicity assume
that the number of points \( n=3 \). We assume also that \( u(x,y) = g(x,y)
\) on the border \( \delta\Omega \).
The inner values of the function \( u \) are then
given by
$$
\begin{align}
4u_{11} -u_{21} -u_{01} - u_{12}- u_{10}=&-\tilde{\rho}_{11} \nonumber \\
4u_{12} - u_{02} - u_{22} - u_{13}- u_{11}=&-\tilde{\rho}_{12} \nonumber \\
4u_{21} - u_{11} - u_{31} - u_{22}- u_{20}=&-\tilde{\rho}_{21} \nonumber \\
4u_{22} - u_{12} - u_{32} - u_{23}- u_{21}=&-\tilde{\rho}_{22}. \nonumber
\end{align}
$$
Scheme for solving Laplace's (Poisson's) equation
If we isolate on the left-hand side the unknown quantities \( u_{11} \), \( u_{12} \), \( u_{21} \) and \( u_{22} \), that is
the inner points not constrained by the boundary conditions, we can
rewrite the above equations as a matrix \( \mathbf{A} \) times an unknown vector \( \mathbf{x} \), that is
$$
\begin{equation*}
Ax = b,
\end{equation*}
$$
or in more detail
$$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{bmatrix} 4&-1 &-1 &0 \\
-1& 4 &0 &-1 \\
-1& 0 &4 &-1 \\
0& -1 &-1 &4 \\
\end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}
u_{11}\\
u_{12}\\
u_{21} \\
u_{22} \\
\end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix}
u_{01}+u_{10}-\tilde{\rho}_{11}\\
u_{13}+u_{02}-\tilde{\rho}_{12}\\
u_{31}+u_{20}-\tilde{\rho}_{21} \\
u_{32}+u_{23}-\tilde{\rho}_{22}\\
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Scheme for solving Laplace's (Poisson's) equation
The right hand side is constrained by the values at the boundary plus the known function \( \tilde{\rho} \).
For a two-dimensional equation it is easy to convince oneself that for larger sets of mesh points,
we will not have more than five function values for every row of the above matrix. For a problem with \( n+1 \)
mesh points, our matrix \( \mathbf{A}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{(n+1)\times (n+1)} \) leads to \( (n-1)\times (n-1) \) unknown function
values \( u_{ij} \).
This means that, if we fix the endpoints for the two-dimensional case (with a square lattice) at \( i(j)=0 \)
and \( i(j)=n+1 \), we have to solve the equations for \( 1 \ge i(j) le n \).
Since the matrix is rather sparse but is not on a tridiagonal form, elimination methods like the LU decomposition discussed, are not very practical. Rather, iterative schemes like Jacobi's method or the Gauss-Seidel are preferred.
The above matrix is also always diagonally dominant, a necessary condition
for these iterative solvers to converge.
Scheme for solving Laplace's (Poisson's) equation using Jacobi's iterative method
In setting up for example Jacobi's method, it is useful to rewrite the matrix \( \mathbf{A} \) as
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{A}=\mathbf{D}+\mathbf{U}+\mathbf{L},
\end{equation*}
$$
with \( \mathbf{D} \) being a diagonal matrix with \( 4 \) as the only value, \( \mathbf{U} \) is an upper triangular matrix and \( \mathbf{L} \)
a lower triangular matrix. In our case we have
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{D}=\begin{bmatrix}4&0 &0 &0 \\
0& 4 &0 &0 \\
0& 0 &4 &0 \\
0& 0 &0 &4 \\
\end{bmatrix},
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{L}=\begin{bmatrix} 0&0 &0 &0 \\
-1& 0 &0 &0 \\
-1& 0 &0 &0 \\
0& -1 &-1 &0 \\
\end{bmatrix} \hspace{1cm} \mathbf{U}= \begin{bmatrix}
0&-1 &-1 &0 \\
0& 0 &0 &-1 \\
0& 0 &0 &-1 \\
0& 0 &0 &0 \\
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Scheme for solving Laplace's (Poisson's) equation, with Jacobi's method
We assume now that we have an estimate for the unknown functions \( u_{11} \), \( u_{12} \), \( u_{21} \) and \( u_{22} \). We will call this
the zeroth value and label it as
\( u^{(0)}_{11} \), \( u^{(0)}_{12} \), \( u^{(0)}_{21} \) and \( u^{(0)}_{22} \). We can then set up an iterative scheme where the next solution
is defined in terms of the previous one as
$$
\begin{align}
u^{(1)}_{11} =&\frac{1}{4}(b_1-u^{(0)}_{12} -u^{(0)}_{21}) \nonumber \\
u^{(1)}_{12} =&\frac{1}{4}(b_2-u^{(0)}_{11}-u^{(0)}_{22}) \nonumber \\
u^{(1)}_{21} =&\frac{1}{4}(b_3-u^{(0)}_{11}-u^{(0)}_{22}) \nonumber \\
u^{(1)}_{22}=&\frac{1}{4}(b_4-u^{(0)}_{12}-u^{(0)}_{21}), \nonumber
\end{align}
$$
where we have defined the vector
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{b}= \begin{bmatrix} u_{01}+u_{10}-\tilde{\rho}_{11}\\
u_{13}+u_{02}-\tilde{\rho}_{12}\\
u_{31}+u_{20}-\tilde{\rho}_{21} \\
u_{32}+u_{23}-\tilde{\rho}_{22}\\
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Scheme for solving Laplace's (Poisson's) equation, final rewrite
We can rewrite the equations in a more compact form in terms of the matrices \( \mathbf{D} \), \( \mathbf{L} \) and \( \mathbf{U} \) as,
after \( r+1 \) iterations,
$$
\begin{equation} \label{eq:jacobisolverpoisson}
\mathbf{x}^{(r+1)}= \mathbf{D}^{-1}\left(\mathbf{b} - (\mathbf{L}+\mathbf{U})\mathbf{x}^{(r)}\right),
\end{equation}
$$
where the unknown functions are now defined in terms of
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{x}= \begin{bmatrix} u_{11}\\
u_{12}\\
u_{21}\\
u_{22}\\
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
$$
If we wish to implement Gauss-Seidel's algorithm,
the set of equations to solve are then given by
$$
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gausseidelsolverpoisson}
\mathbf{x}^{(r+1)}= -(\mathbf{D}+\mathbf{L})^{-1}\left(\mathbf{b} -\mathbf{U}\mathbf{x}^{(r)}\right),
\end{equation}
$$
or alternatively as
$$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{x}^{(r+1)}= \mathbf{D}^{-1}\left(\mathbf{b} -\mathbf{L}\mathbf{x}^{(r+1)}-\mathbf{U}\mathbf{x}^{(r)}\right).
\end{equation*}
$$
Jacobi Algorithm for solving Laplace's Equation
It is thus fairly straightforward to extend this equation to the
three-dimensional case. Whether we solve Eq. \eqref{eq:laplacescheme}
or Eq. \eqref{eq:poissonscheme}, the solution strategy remains the same.
We know the values of \( u \) at \( i=0 \) or \( i=n+1 \) and at \( j=0 \) or
\( j=n+1 \) but we cannot start at one of the boundaries and work our way into and
across the system since Eq. \eqref{eq:laplacescheme} requires the knowledge
of \( u \) at all of the neighbouring points in order to calculate \( u \) at any
given point.
Jacobi Algorithm for solving Laplace's Equation
The way we solve these equations is based on an iterative scheme based on the Jacobi method or
the Gauss-Seidel method or the relaxation methods.
Implementing Jacobi's method is rather simple. We start with an initial guess
for \( u_{i,j}^{(0)} \) where all values are known. To obtain a new solution we
solve Eq. \eqref{eq:laplacescheme} or Eq. \eqref{eq:poissonscheme}
in order to obtain a new solution \( u_{i,j}^{(1)} \).
Most likely this solution will not be a solution to
Eq. \eqref{eq:laplacescheme}. This solution is in turn
used to obtain a new and improved \( u_{i,j}^{(2)} \). We continue this process
till we obtain a result which satisfies some specific convergence criterion.
Jacobi Algorithm for solving Laplace's Equation, the algorithm
Summarized, this algorithm reads
- Make an initial guess for \( u_{i,j} \) at all interior points \( (i,j) \) for all \( i=1:n \) and \( j=1:n \)
- Use Eq. \eqref{eq:laplacescheme} to compute \( u^{m} \) at all interior points \( (i,j) \). The index \( m \) stands for iteration number \( m \).
- Stop if prescribed convergence threshold is reached, otherwise continue to the next step.
- Update the new value of \( u \) for the given iteration
- Go to step 2
Jacobi Algorithm for solving Laplace's Equation, simple example
A simple example may help in understanding this method.
We consider a condensator with parallel
plates separated at a distance \( L \) resulting in for example the voltage differences
\( u(x,0)=200sin(2\pi x/L) \) and
\( u(x,1)=-200sin(2\pi x/L) \). These are our boundary conditions and we ask
what is the voltage \( u \) between the plates?
To solve this problem numerically we provide below a C++ program
which solves iteratively Eq. \eqref{eq:laplacescheme} using Jacobi's method. Only the part which computes
Eq. \eqref{eq:laplacescheme} is included here.
....
// We define the step size for a square lattice with n+1 points
double h = (xmax-xmin)/(n+1);
double L = xmax-xmin; // The length of the lattice
// We allocate space for the vector u and the temporary vector to
// be upgraded in every iteration
mat u( n+1, n+1); // using Armadillo to define matrices
mat u_temp( n+1, n+1); // This is the temporary value
u = 0. // This is also our initial guess for all unknown values
// We need to set up the boundary conditions. Specify for various cases
.....
// The iteration algorithm starts here
iterations = 0;
while( (iterations <= max_iter) && ( diff > 0.00001) ){
u_temp = u; diff = 0.;
for (j = 1; j<= n,j++){
for(l = 1; l <= n; l++){
u(j,l) = 0.25*(u_temp(j+1,l)+u_temp(j-1,l)+ &
u_temp(j,l+1)+u_temp(j,l-1));
diff += fabs(u_temp(i,j)-u(i,j));
}
}
iterations++;
diff /= pow((n),2.0);
} // end while loop
Jacobi Algorithm for solving Laplace's Equation, to observe
The important part of the algorithm is applied in the function which
sets up the two-dimensional Laplace equation. There we have a while
statement which tests the difference between the temporary vector and
the solution \( u_{i,j} \). Moreover, we have fixed the number of
iterations to a given maximum. We need also to provide a convergence
tolerance. In the above program example we have fixed this to be
\( 0.00001 \). Depending on the type of applications one may have to
change both the number of maximum iterations and the tolerance.
Python code for solving the two-dimensional Laplace equation
The following Python code sets up and solves the Laplace equation in two dimensions.
Jacobi's algorithm extended to the diffusion equation in two dimensions
Let us know implement the implicit scheme and show how we can extend the previous algorithm for solving
Laplace's or Poisson's equations to the diffusion equation as well. As the reader will notice, this simply implies a
slight redefinition of the vector \( \mathbf{b} \) defined in Eq. \eqref{eq:jacobisolverpoisson}.
To see this, let us first set up the diffusion in two spatial dimensions, with boundary and initial conditions.
The \( 2+1 \)-dimensional diffusion equation (with dimensionless variables) reads for a function
\( u=u(x,y,t) \)
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}= D\left(\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial y^2}\right).
\end{equation*}
$$
Jacobi's algorithm extended to the diffusion equation in two dimensions
We assume that we have a square lattice of length \( L \) with equally
many mesh points in the \( x \) and \( y \) directions. Setting the diffusion
constant \( D=1 \) and using the shorthand notation
\( u_{xx}={\partial^2 u}/{\partial x^2} \) etc for the second
derivatives and \( u_t={\partial u}/{\partial t} \) for the time
derivative, we have, with a given set of boundary and initial
conditions,
$$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{cc}u_t= u_{xx}+u_{yy}& x, y\in(0,L), t>0 \\
u(x,y,0) = g(x,y)& x, y\in (0,L) \\
u(0,y,t)=u(L,y,t)=u(x,0,t)=u(x,L,t)0 & t > 0\\
\end{array}
\end{equation*}
$$
Jacobi's algorithm extended to the diffusion equation in two dimensions, discretizing
We discretize again position and time, and use the following approximation for the second derivatives
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u(x+h,y,t)-2u(x,y,t)+u(x-h,y,t)}{h^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
which we rewrite as, in its discretized version,
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u^{l}_{i+1,j}-2u^{l}_{i,j}+u^{l}_{i-1,j}}{h^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
where \( x_i=x_0+ih \), \( y_j=y_0+jh \) and \( t_l=t_0+l\Delta t \), with \( h=L/(n+1) \) and \( \Delta t \) the time step.
Jacobi's algorithm extended to the diffusion equation in two dimensions, the second derivative
The second derivative with respect to \( y \) reads
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{yy}\approx \frac{u^{l}_{i,j+1}-2u^{l}_{i,j}+u^{l}_{i,j-1}}{h^2}.
\end{equation*}
$$
We use now the so-called backward going Euler formula for the first derivative in time. In its discretized form we have
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{t}\approx \frac{u^{l}_{i,j}-u^{l-1}_{i,j}}{\Delta t},
\end{equation*}
$$
resulting in
$$
\begin{equation*}
u^{l}_{i,j}+4\alpha u^{l}_{i,j}- \alpha\left[u^{l}_{i+1,j}+u^{l}_{i-1,j}+u^{l}_{i,j+1}+u^{l}_{i,j-1}\right] = u^{l-1}_{i,j},
\end{equation*}
$$
where the right hand side is the only known term, since starting with \( t=t_0 \), the right hand side is entirely
determined by the boundary and initial conditions. We have \( \alpha=\Delta t/h^2 \).
Jacobi's algorithm extended to the diffusion equation in two dimensions
For future time steps, only the boundary values are determined
and we need to solve the equations for the interior part in an iterative way similar to what was done for Laplace's or Poisson's equations.
To see this, we rewrite the previous equation as
$$
\begin{equation*}
u^{l}_{i,j}= \frac{1}{1+4\alpha}\left[\alpha(u^{l}_{i+1,j}+u^{l}_{i-1,j}+u^{l}_{i,j+1}+u^{l}_{i,j-1})+u^{l-1}_{i,j}\right],
\end{equation*}
$$
or in a more compact form as
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:implicitdiff2dim}
u^{l}_{i,j}= \frac{1}{1+4\alpha}\left[\alpha\Delta^l_{ij}+u^{l-1}_{i,j}\right],
\end{equation}
$$
with \( \Delta^l_{ij}= \left[u^l_{i,j+1}+u^l_{i,j-1}+u^l_{i+1,j}+u^l_{i-1,j}\right] \).
This equation has essentially the same structure as Eq. \eqref{eq:poissonrewritten}, except that
the function \( \rho_{ij} \) is replaced by the solution at a previous time step \( l-1 \). Furthermore, the diagonal matrix elements
are now given by \( 1+4\alpha \), while the non-zero non-diagonal matrix elements equal \( \alpha \). This matrix is also positive definite, meaning in turn that
iterative schemes like the Jacobi or the Gauss-Seidel methods will converge to the desired solution after a given number of iterations.
Let us revisit project 1 and the Thomas algorithm for solving a system of tridiagonal matrices for the equation
// Solves linear equations for simple tridiagonal matrix using the iterative Jacobi method
....
// Begin main program
int main(int argc, char *argv[]){
// missing statements, see code link above
mat A = zeros<mat>(n,n);
// Set up arrays for the simple case
vec b(n); vec x(n);
A(0,1) = -1; x(0) = h; b(0) = hh*f(x(0));
x(n-1) = x(0)+(n-1)*h; b(n-1) = hh*f(x(n-1));
for (int i = 1; i < n-1; i++){
x(i) = x(i-1)+h;
b(i) = hh*f(x(i));
A(i,i-1) = -1.0;
A(i,i+1) = -1.0;
}
A(n-2,n-1) = -1.0; A(n-1,n-2) = -1.0;
// solve Ax = b by iteration with a random starting vector
int maxiter = 100; double diff = 1.0;
double epsilon = 1.0e-10; int iter = 0;
vec SolutionOld = randu<vec>(n);
vec SolutionNew = zeros<vec>(n);
while (iter <= maxiter || diff > epsilon){
SolutionNew = (b -A*SolutionOld)*0.5;
iter++; diff = fabs(sum(SolutionNew-SolutionOld)/n);
SolutionOld = SolutionNew;
}
vec solution = SolutionOld;}
The following program sets up the diffusion equation solver in two spatial dimensions using Jacobi's method. Note that we have skipped a loop over time. This has to be inserted in order to perform the calculations.
/* Simple program for solving the two-dimensional diffusion
equation or Poisson equation using Jacobi's iterative method
Note that this program does not contain a loop over the time
dependence.
*/
#include <iostream>
#include <iomanip>
#include <armadillo>
using namespace std;
using namespace arma;
int JacobiSolver(int, double, double, mat &, mat &, double);
int main(int argc, char * argv[]){
int Npoints = 40;
double ExactSolution;
double dx = 1.0/(Npoints-1);
double dt = 0.25*dx*dx;
double tolerance = 1.0e-14;
mat A = zeros<mat>(Npoints,Npoints);
mat q = zeros<mat>(Npoints,Npoints);
// setting up an additional source term
for(int i = 0; i < Npoints; i++)
for(int j = 0; j < Npoints; j++)
q(i,j) = -2.0*M_PI*M_PI*sin(M_PI*dx*i)*sin(M_PI*dx*j);
int itcount = JacobiSolver(Npoints,dx,dt,A,q,tolerance);
// Testing against exact solution
double sum = 0.0;
for(int i = 0; i < Npoints; i++){
for(int j=0;j < Npoints; j++){
ExactSolution = -sin(M_PI*dx*i)*sin(M_PI*dx*j);
sum += fabs((A(i,j) - ExactSolution));
}
}
cout << setprecision(5) << setiosflags(ios::scientific);
cout << "Jacobi method with error " << sum/Npoints << " in " << itcount << " iterations" << endl;
}
// Function for setting up the iterative Jacobi solver
int JacobiSolver(int N, double dx, double dt, mat &A, mat &q, double abstol)
{
int MaxIterations = 100000;
mat Aold = zeros<mat>(N,N);
double D = dt/(dx*dx);
for(int i=1; i < N-1; i++)
for(int j=1; j < N-1; j++)
Aold(i,j) = 1.0;
// Boundary Conditions -- all zeros
for(int i=0; i < N; i++){
A(0,i) = 0.0;
A(N-1,i) = 0.0;
A(i,0) = 0.0;
A(i,N-1) = 0.0;
}
// Start the iterative solver
for(int k = 0; k < MaxIterations; k++){
for(int i = 1; i < N-1; i++){
for(int j=1; j < N-1; j++){
A(i,j) = dt*q(i,j) + Aold(i,j) +
D*(Aold(i+1,j) + Aold(i,j+1) - 4.0*Aold(i,j) +
Aold(i-1,j) + Aold(i,j-1));
}
}
double sum = 0.0;
for(int i = 0; i < N;i++){
for(int j = 0; j < N;j++){
sum += (Aold(i,j)-A(i,j))*(Aold(i,j)-A(i,j));
Aold(i,j) = A(i,j);
}
}
if(sqrt (sum) <abstol){
return k;
}
}
cerr << "Jacobi: Maximum Number of Interations Reached Without Convergence\n";
return MaxIterations;
}
In order to parallelize the Jacobi method we need to introduce to new MPI functions, namely MPIGather and MPIAllgather.
Here we present a parallel implementation of the Jacobi method without an explicit link to the diffusion equation. Let us go back to the plain Jacobi method
and implement it in parallel.
// Main program first
#include <mpi.h>
// Omitted statements
int main(int argc, char * argv[]){
int i,j, N = 20;
double **A,*x,*q;
int totalnodes,mynode;
MPI_Init(&argc,&argv);
MPI_Comm_size(MPI_COMM_WORLD, &totalnodes);
MPI_Comm_rank(MPI_COMM_WORLD, &mynode);
if(mynode==0){
}
ParallelJacobi(mynode,totalnodes,N,A,x,q,1.0e-14);
if(mynode==0){
for(int i = 0; i < N; i++)
cout << x[i] << endl;
}
MPI_Finalize();
}
Here follows the parallel implementation of the Jacobi algorithm
int ParallelJacobi(int mynode, int numnodes, int N, double **A, double *x, double *b, double abstol){
int i,j,k,i_global;
int maxit = 100000;
int rows_local,local_offset,last_rows_local,*count,*displacements;
double sum1,sum2,*xold;
double error_sum_local, error_sum_global;
MPI_Status status;
rows_local = (int) floor((double)N/numnodes);
local_offset = mynode*rows_local;
if(mynode == (numnodes-1))
rows_local = N - rows_local*(numnodes-1);
/*Distribute the Matrix and R.H.S. among the processors */
if(mynode == 0){
for(i=1;i<numnodes-1;i++){
for(j=0;j<rows_local;j++)
MPI_Send(A[i*rows_local+j],N,MPI_DOUBLE,i,j,MPI_COMM_WORLD);
MPI_Send(b+i*rows_local,rows_local,MPI_DOUBLE,i,rows_local,
MPI_COMM_WORLD);
}
last_rows_local = N-rows_local*(numnodes-1);
for(j=0;j<last_rows_local;j++)
MPI_Send(A[(numnodes-1)*rows_local+j],N,MPI_DOUBLE,numnodes-1,j,
MPI_COMM_WORLD);
MPI_Send(b+(numnodes-1)*rows_local,last_rows_local,MPI_DOUBLE,numnodes-1,
last_rows_local,MPI_COMM_WORLD);
}
else{
A = CreateMatrix(rows_local,N);
x = new double[rows_local];
b = new double[rows_local];
for(i=0;i<rows_local;i++)
MPI_Recv(A[i],N,MPI_DOUBLE,0,i,MPI_COMM_WORLD,&status);
MPI_Recv(b,rows_local,MPI_DOUBLE,0,rows_local,MPI_COMM_WORLD,&status);
}
xold = new double[N];
count = new int[numnodes];
displacements = new int[numnodes];
//set initial guess to all 1.0
for(i=0; i<N; i++){
xold[i] = 1.0;
}
for(i=0;i<numnodes;i++){
count[i] = (int) floor((double)N/numnodes);
displacements[i] = i*count[i];
}
count[numnodes-1] = N - ((int)floor((double)N/numnodes))*(numnodes-1);
for(k=0; k<maxit; k++){
error_sum_local = 0.0;
for(i = 0; i<rows_local; i++){
i_global = local_offset+i;
sum1 = 0.0; sum2 = 0.0;
for(j=0; j < i_global; j++)
sum1 = sum1 + A[i][j]*xold[j];
for(j=i_global+1; j < N; j++)
sum2 = sum2 + A[i][j]*xold[j];
x[i] = (-sum1 - sum2 + b[i])/A[i][i_global];
error_sum_local += (x[i]-xold[i_global])*(x[i]-xold[i_global]);
}
MPI_Allreduce(&error_sum_local,&error_sum_global,1,MPI_DOUBLE,
MPI_SUM,MPI_COMM_WORLD);
MPI_Allgatherv(x,rows_local,MPI_DOUBLE,xold,count,displacements,
MPI_DOUBLE,MPI_COMM_WORLD);
if(sqrt(error_sum_global)<abstol){
if(mynode == 0){
for(i=0;i<N;i++)
x[i] = xold[i];
}
else{
DestroyMatrix(A,rows_local,N);
delete[] x;
delete[] b;
}
delete[] xold;
delete[] count;
delete[] displacements;
return k;
}
}
cerr << "Jacobi: Maximum Number of Interations Reached Without Convergence\n";
if(mynode == 0){
for(i=0;i<N;i++)
x[i] = xold[i];
}
else{
DestroyMatrix(A,rows_local,N);
delete[] x;
delete[] b;
}
delete[] xold;
delete[] count;
delete[] displacements;
return maxit;
}
Here follows the parallel implementation of the diffusion equation using OpenMP
/* Simple program for solving the two-dimensional diffusion
equation or Poisson equation using Jacobi's iterative method
Note that this program does not contain a loop over the time
dependence. It uses OpenMP to parallelize
*/
#include <iostream>
#include <iomanip>
#include <armadillo>
#include <omp.h>
using namespace std;
using namespace arma;
int JacobiSolver(int, double, double, mat &, mat &, double);
int main(int argc, char * argv[]){
int Npoints = 100;
double ExactSolution;
double dx = 1.0/(Npoints-1);
double dt = 0.25*dx*dx;
double tolerance = 1.0e-8;
mat A = zeros<mat>(Npoints,Npoints);
mat q = zeros<mat>(Npoints,Npoints);
int thread_num;
omp_set_num_threads(4);
thread_num = omp_get_max_threads ();
cout << " The number of processors available = " << omp_get_num_procs () << endl ;
cout << " The number of threads available = " << thread_num << endl;
// setting up an additional source term
for(int i = 0; i < Npoints; i++)
for(int j = 0; j < Npoints; j++)
q(i,j) = -2.0*M_PI*M_PI*sin(M_PI*dx*i)*sin(M_PI*dx*j);
int itcount = JacobiSolver(Npoints,dx,dt,A,q,tolerance);
// Testing against exact solution
double sum = 0.0;
for(int i = 0; i < Npoints; i++){
for(int j=0;j < Npoints; j++){
ExactSolution = -sin(M_PI*dx*i)*sin(M_PI*dx*j);
sum += fabs((A(i,j) - ExactSolution));
}
}
cout << setprecision(5) << setiosflags(ios::scientific);
cout << "Jacobi error is " << sum/Npoints << " in " << itcount << " iterations" << endl;
}
// Function for setting up the iterative Jacobi solver
int JacobiSolver(int N, double dx, double dt, mat &A, mat &q, double abstol)
{
int MaxIterations = 100000;
double D = dt/(dx*dx);
// initial guess
mat Aold = randu<mat>(N,N);
// Boundary conditions, all zeros
for(int i=0; i < N; i++){
A(0,i) = 0.0;
A(N-1,i) = 0.0;
A(i,0) = 0.0;
A(i,N-1) = 0.0;
}
double sum = 1.0;
int k = 0;
// Start the iterative solver
while (k < MaxIterations && sum > abstol){
int i, j;
sum = 0.0;
// Define parallel region
# pragma omp parallel default(shared) private (i, j) reduction(+:sum)
{
# pragma omp for
for(i = 1; i < N-1; i++){
for(j = 1; j < N-1; j++){
A(i,j) = dt*q(i,j) + Aold(i,j) +
D*(Aold(i+1,j) + Aold(i,j+1) - 4.0*Aold(i,j) +
Aold(i-1,j) + Aold(i,j-1));
}
}
for(i = 0; i < N;i++){
for(j = 0; j < N;j++){
sum += fabs(Aold(i,j)-A(i,j));
Aold(i,j) = A(i,j);
}
}
sum /= (N*N);
} //end parallel region
k++;
} //end while loop
return k;
}
Wave Equation in two Dimensions
The \( 1+1 \)-dimensional wave equation reads
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}=\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial t^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
with \( u=u(x,t) \) and we have assumed that we operate with
dimensionless variables. Possible boundary and initial conditions
with \( L=1 \) are
$$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{cc} u_{xx} = u_{tt}& x\in(0,1), t>0 \\
u(x,0) = g(x)& x\in (0,1) \\
u(0,t)=u(1,t)=0 & t > 0\\
\partial u/\partial t|_{t=0}=0 & x\in (0,1)\\
\end{array} .
\end{equation*}
$$
Wave Equation in two Dimensions, discretizing
We discretize again time and position,
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u(x+\Delta x,t)-2u(x,t)+u(x-\Delta x,t)}{\Delta x^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{tt}\approx \frac{u(x,t+\Delta t)-2u(x,t)+u(x,t-\Delta t)}{\Delta t^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
which we rewrite as
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u_{i+1,j}-2u_{i,j}+u_{i-1,j}}{\Delta x^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{tt}\approx \frac{u_{i,j+1}-2u_{i,j}+u_{i,j-1}}{\Delta t^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
resulting in
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:wavescheme}
u_{i,j+1}=2u_{i,j}-u_{i,j-1}+\frac{\Delta t^2}{\Delta x^2}\left(u_{i+1,j}-2u_{i,j}+u_{i-1,j}\right).
\end{equation}
$$
Wave Equation in two Dimensions
If we assume that all values at times \( t=j \) and \( t=j-1 \) are known, the only unknown variable is \( u_{i,j+1} \) and the last equation yields thus an explicit
scheme for updating this quantity. We have thus an explicit finite difference
scheme for computing the wave function \( u \). The only additional complication
in our case is the initial condition given by the first derivative in time,
namely \( \partial u/\partial t|_{t=0}=0 \).
The discretized version of this first derivative is given by
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_t\approx \frac{u(x_i,t_j+\Delta t)-u(x_i,t_j-\Delta t)}{2\Delta t},
\end{equation*}
$$
and at \( t=0 \) it reduces to
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_t\approx \frac{u_{i,+1}-u_{i,-1}}{2\Delta t}=0,
\end{equation*}
$$
implying that \( u_{i,+1}=u_{i,-1} \).
Wave Equation in two Dimensions
If we insert this condition in Eq. \eqref{eq:wavescheme} we arrive at a
special formula for the first time step
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:firstwavescheme}
u_{i,1}=u_{i,0}+\frac{\Delta t^2}{2\Delta x^2}\left(u_{i+1,0}-2u_{i,0}+u_{i-1,0}\right).
\end{equation}
$$
We need seemingly two different equations, one for the first time step
given by Eq. \eqref{eq:firstwavescheme} and one for all other time-steps
given by Eq. \eqref{eq:wavescheme}. However, it suffices to use
Eq. \eqref{eq:wavescheme} for all times as long as we
provide \( u(i,-1) \) using
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{i,-1}=u_{i,0}+\frac{\Delta t^2}{2\Delta x^2}\left(u_{i+1,0}-2u_{i,0}+u_{i-1,0}\right),
\end{equation*}
$$
in our setup of the initial conditions.
Wave Equation in two Dimensions
The situation is rather similar for the \( 2+1 \)-dimensional case,
except that we now need to discretize the spatial \( y \)-coordinate as well.
Our equations will now depend on three variables whose discretized versions
are now
$$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{cc} t_l=l\Delta t& l \ge 0 \\
x_i=i\Delta x& 0 \le i \le n_x\\
y_j=j\Delta y& 0 \le j \le n_y\end{array} ,
\end{equation*}
$$
and we will let \( \Delta x=\Delta y = h \) and \( n_x=n_y \) for the sake of
simplicity.
The equation with initial and boundary conditions reads now
$$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{cc} u_{xx}+u_{yy} = u_{tt}& x,y\in(0,1), t>0 \\
u(x,y,0) = g(x,y)& x,y\in (0,1) \\
u(0,0,t)=u(1,1,t)=0 & t > 0\\
\partial u/\partial t|_{t=0}=0 & x,y\in (0,1)\\
\end{array}.
\end{equation*}
$$
Wave Equation in two Dimensions
We have now the following discretized partial derivatives
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{xx}\approx \frac{u_{i+1,j}^l-2u_{i,j}^l+u_{i-1,j}^l}{h^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{yy}\approx \frac{u_{i,j+1}^l-2u_{i,j}^l+u_{i,j-1}^l}{h^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{tt}\approx \frac{u_{i,j}^{l+1}-2u_{i,j}^{l}+u_{i,j}^{l-1}}{\Delta t^2},
\end{equation*}
$$
which we merge into the discretized \( 2+1 \)-dimensional wave equation
as
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:21wavescheme}
u_{i,j}^{l+1}
=2u_{i,j}^{l}-u_{i,j}^{l-1}+\frac{\Delta t^2}{h^2}\left(u_{i+1,j}^l-4u_{i,j}^l+u_{i-1,j}^l+u_{i,j+1}^l+u_{i,j-1}^l\right),
\end{equation}
$$
where again we have an explicit scheme with \( u_{i,j}^{l+1} \) as the only
unknown quantity.
Wave Equation in two Dimensions
It is easy to account for different step lengths for \( x \) and \( y \).
The partial derivative is treated in much the same way
as for the one-dimensional case, except that we now have an additional
index due to the extra spatial dimension, viz., we need to compute
\( u_{i,j}^{-1} \) through
$$
\begin{equation*}
u_{i,j}^{-1}=u_{i,j}^0+\frac{\Delta t}{2h^2}\left(u_{i+1,j}^0-4u_{i,j}^0+u_{i-1,j}^0+u_{i,j+1}^0+u_{i,j-1}^0\right),
\end{equation*}
$$
in our setup of the initial conditions.
Analytical Solution for the two-dimensional wave equation
We develop here the closed-form solution for the \( 2+1 \) dimensional wave equation with the following boundary and initial conditions
$$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{cc} c^2(u_{xx}+u_{yy}) = u_{tt}& x,y\in(0,L), t>0 \\
u(x,y,0) = f(x,y) & x,y\in (0,L) \\
u(0,0,t)=u(L,L,t)=0 & t > 0\\
\partial u/\partial t|_{t=0}= g(x,y) & x,y\in (0,L)\\
\end{array} .
\end{equation*}
$$
Analytical Solution for the two-dimensional wave equation, first step
Our first step is to make the ansatz
$$
\begin{equation*}
u(x,y,t) = F(x,y) G(t),
\end{equation*}
$$
resulting in the equation
$$
\begin{equation*}
FG_{tt}= c^2(F_{xx}G+F_{yy}G),
\end{equation*}
$$
or
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{G_{tt}}{c^2G} = \frac{1}{F}(F_{xx}+F_{yy}) = -\nu^2.
\end{equation*}
$$
Analytical Solution for the two-dimensional wave equation,
The lhs and rhs are independent of each other and we obtain two differential equations
$$
\begin{equation*}
F_{xx}+F_{yy}+F\nu^2=0,
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
G_{tt} + Gc^2\nu^2 = G_{tt} + G\lambda^2 = 0,
\end{equation*}
$$
with \( \lambda = c\nu \).
We can in turn make the following ansatz for the \( x \) and \( y \) dependent part
$$
\begin{equation*}
F(x,y) = H(x)Q(y),
\end{equation*}
$$
which results in
$$
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{H}H_{xx} = -\frac{1}{Q}(Q_{yy}+Q\nu^2)= -\kappa^2.
\end{equation*}
$$
Analytical Solution for the two-dimensional wave equation, separation of variables
Since the lhs and rhs are again independent of each other, we can separate the latter equation into two independent
equations, one for \( x \) and one for \( y \), namely
$$
\begin{equation*}
H_{xx} + \kappa^2H = 0,
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
Q_{yy} + \rho^2Q = 0,
\end{equation*}
$$
with \( \rho^2= \nu^2-\kappa^2 \).
Analytical Solution for the two-dimensional wave equation, separation of variables
The second step is to solve these differential equations, which all have trigonometric functions as solutions, viz.
$$
\begin{equation*}
H(x) = A\cos(\kappa x)+B\sin(\kappa x),
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
Q(y) = C\cos(\rho y)+D\sin(\rho y).
\end{equation*}
$$
Analytical Solution for the two-dimensional wave equation, boundary conditions
The boundary conditions require that \( F(x,y) = H(x)Q(y) \) are zero at the boundaries, meaning that
\( H(0)=H(L)=Q(0)=Q(L)=0 \). This yields the solutions
$$
\begin{equation*}
H_m(x) = \sin(\frac{m\pi x}{L}) \hspace{1cm} Q_n(y) = \sin(\frac{n\pi y}{L}),
\end{equation*}
$$
or
$$
\begin{equation*}
F_{mn}(x,y) = \sin(\frac{m\pi x}{L})\sin(\frac{n\pi y}{L}).
\end{equation*}
$$
With \( \rho^2= \nu^2-\kappa^2 \) and \( \lambda = c\nu \) we have an eigenspectrum \( \lambda=c\sqrt{\kappa^2+\rho^2} \)
or \( \lambda_{mn}= c\pi/L\sqrt{m^2+n^2} \).
Analytical Solution for the two-dimensional wave equation, separation of variables and solutions
The solution for \( G \) is
$$
\begin{equation*}
G_{mn}(t) = B_{mn}\cos(\lambda_{mn} t)+D_{mn}\sin(\lambda_{mn} t),
\end{equation*}
$$
with the general solution of the form
$$
\begin{equation*}
u(x,y,t) = \sum_{mn=1}^{\infty} u_{mn}(x,y,t) = \sum_{mn=1}^{\infty}F_{mn}(x,y)G_{mn}(t).
\end{equation*}
$$
Analytical Solution for the two-dimensional wave equation, final steps
The final step is to determine the coefficients \( B_{mn} \) and \( D_{mn} \) from the Fourier coefficients.
The equations for these are determined by the initial conditions \( u(x,y,0) = f(x,y) \) and
\( \partial u/\partial t|_{t=0}= g(x,y) \).
The final expressions are
$$
\begin{equation*}
B_{mn} = \frac{2}{L}\int_0^L\int_0^L dxdy f(x,y) \sin(\frac{m\pi x}{L})\sin(\frac{n\pi y}{L}),
\end{equation*}
$$
and
$$
\begin{equation*}
D_{mn} = \frac{2}{L}\int_0^L\int_0^L dxdy g(x,y) \sin(\frac{m\pi x}{L})\sin(\frac{n\pi y}{L}).
\end{equation*}
$$
Inserting the particular functional forms of \( f(x,y) \) and \( g(x,y) \) one obtains the final closed-form expressions.
Python code for solving the two-dimensional wave equation
The following Python code sets up and solves the two-dimensional wave equation for all three methods discussed.
© 1999-2020, Morten Hjorth-Jensen. Released under CC Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 license


THE CULT OF DONE MANIFESTO
Bre Pettis and Kio Stark
- There are three states of being.
Not knowing, action and completion.
- Accept that everything is a draft.
It helps to get done.
- There is no editing stage.
- Pretending you know what you’re doing
is almost the same as knowing what you
are doing, so just accept that you know
what you’re doing even if you don’t
and do it.
- Banish procrastination. If you wait more
than a week to get an idea done, abandon it.
- The point of being done is not to finish but
to get other things done.
- Once you’re done you can throw it away.
- Laugh at perfection.
It’s boring and keeps
you
from being done.
- People without dirty hands are wrong.
Doing something makes you right.
- Failure counts as done. So do mistakes.
- Destruction is a variant of done.
- If you have an idea and publish it on the
internet, that counts as a ghost of done.
- Done is the engine of more.


--- layout: post authors: ["Shreyas Cholia"] title: "eResearch New Zealand 2013 Bootcamp Roundup" date: 2013-07-14 time: "09:00:00" tags: ["eResearch New Zealand"] ---
New Zealand is an amazing place - incredibly beautiful, with a very friendly vibe. We (Ariel Rokem and Shreyas Cholia) had the privilege of traveling all the way from California, to run a bootcamp down in Christchurch, as part of the eResearch NZ 2013 conference.
The eResearch event brings together a fairly diverse set of researchers across New Zealand. The goal of the event is to provide them with a venue for "connecting and collaborating on their computational and data related research". Software Carpentry was invited to help teach a workshop for the duration of the event to help scientists build better software.
We broke from the traditional bootcamp format to help us fit into the event. We ran 4 half-day afternoon sessions:
The audience was even more mixed than usual. We had the usual cast of relative-novice post-docs and graduate students + a couple of faculty and research staff. But we had at least a few rather computationally-experienced participants who were there to learn what this kind of thing looks like, so that they can ultimately become instructors leading their own bootcamps. Nevertheless, most participants learned some new things from the sessions, and as always we also learned a few things just from being there.
The good news is that the parts that really seemed to resonate were the ideas behind reproducible science, good software design and maintaining version history. While we introduced people to a lot of tools - the take home message was about using these tools in the right way and for the right purpose.
A big thanks to Nick Jones, Tim McNamara and the rest of the NeSI team for helping us put on the event.
Bootcamp links:


Parallax is an effect where the background content or image in this case, is moved at a different speed than the foreground content while scrolling.
Parallax scrolling is a technique in computer graphics and web design, where background images move by the camera slower than foreground images, creating an illusion of depth in a 2D scene and adding to the immersion. The technique grew out of the multiplane camera technique used in traditional animation since the 1930s. Parallax scrolling was popularized in 2D computer graphics and video games by the arcade games Moon Patrol and Jungle Hunt, both released in 1982. Some parallax scrolling had earlier been used by the 1981 arcade game Jump Bug.
wikipedia.org
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax_scrolling
Parallax container can be customized using the following properties on the mz-parallax
element.


--- layout: post title: Thoughts on Personal Brand date: 2013-02-12 12:53:11.000000000 -08:00 categories: - technical-writing tags: [] status: draft type: post published: false ---
I like to get back in touch with my LI connections from time to time. So, How is it going with you lately? I'm glad to be connected to a very active technical writer :) no wonder you got the "#1 most influential tech comm blogger in 2011". What does that mean to you?
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!


--- title: Contact author: '' date: '2020-05-12' slug: contact categories: [] tags: [] description: 'Contact us' topics: [] ---
Have questions or suggestions? Feel free to contact Dr. Ken Frank via email or open an issue on GitHub.


In the beginning Bitcoin network transactions where secured by individual hobbyist miners. With the introduction of ASIC hardware security, functionality has been disproportionately concentrated into a handful of corporations making it less secure.
Bitcoin Gold blockchain database is going to be secured with Equihash algorithm that is ASIC resistant. Being able to mine bitcoin with conventional GPU hardware ensures Bitcoin Gold network security functions are well distributed across the world.


The hearing is only about the judgment
{% if data['alreadysettled'] == 'true' %}You've settled the original claim, but there might need to be a hearing about your request to cancel the judgment.
{% else %}It's not about the original claim.
If the judgment is cancelled there might be another hearing later, about the claim. If there is we'll ask you for your requirements again.
{% endif %}


Karim talked several times about the immense work load that the bootcamp presents. At one point he even recommends that we give a letter to our family and friends to say that we will be unavailable for the next 9 weeks. This got me quite worried about my ability to commit so fully but also excited me because I am excited to push myself to my very limit.
At one point a viewer asks him about the importance of IQ in applicants ability to code, he pinned it at around 5%. I found this surprising but encouraging and it motivated me to study as much as possible
When Karim talked about the importance of soft skills in finding a job I found it very interesting.
I know see this to be obviously ridiculous and I'm happy about it because I consider myself to be a social person and increase those team work skills is something which will benifit me as a person as well as help me find a job.


Two way bind data models with directives to form fields
Build form models and use reactive programming to get data


{% extends "pages/base_wrapper.html" %} {% load wagtailcore_tags %} {% load static %} {% block content %}
On August 24, 2017, Our Revolution turns one year old. Join us as we reflect on a year of progress and look forward to the next chapter of our political movement.
Our Revolution is made up of 401 local groups from all across the world. With groups in 49 states, Puerto Rico, and 7 countries, the political revolution continues under the leadership of local leaders all across the globe.
Our Revolution groups have elected candidates across the nation, passed ballot initiatives, reorganized their local parties, held candidate trainings and advocated for issues that are driving our nation forward - and we’re just getting started.
Our Revolution is empowering the next generation of progressive leaders by inspiring and supporting candidates to run for office across the entire spectrum of government, as well as endorsing and supporting ballot initiatives across the country.
Over the past year, 75 Our Revolution endorsed candidates and 24 ballot initiatives all over the country have shocked the political establishment. khalid kamau ran a grassroots powered campaign to become South Fulton's next city council member. Christine Pellegrino won in a district where a Republican previously won by 22,000 votes. Chokwe Antar Lumumba won a stunning 93% of the vote to become the Mayor of Jackson, Mississipi. All over the country, inspiring progressive candidates are proving that when we stand together, there's nothing we cannot accomplish.
Over the last year, more than 16,000 people have stepped up to run for Democratic Party leadership in 18 states and 20 Democrats Abroad member countries as a result of our efforts.
We now have allies holding state chair, county chair and other executive positions across the country, and they are actively working to transform the Democratic Party into a party that truly reflects and represents the people in each and every community throughout the U.S.
Our Revolution groups have been fighting for progressive issues all across the country - and we’ve been winning.
Right now, a mass coalition of progressive organizations are leading the Summer for Progress, an effort to get House Democrats to endorse the People’s Platform – 8 bills that say definitively people over profit.
Over the past year, citizen leaders have organized sit-ins and rallies across the country to save tha ACA and we’ve pushed for sanctuary community policies all around the country. We’ve fought pipelines and stopped the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and successfully petitioned for the freedom of Oscar Lopez Rivera.
Our Revolution is completey funded by individual donations, proving that organizations and candidates don’t have to rely on huge corporate contributions to thrive.
Our Revolution's founding supporters made more than 140,000 individual contributions during the organization's first six months, and more than 58,000 contributions during the first quarter of 2017.
DonateThank you for being a part of the political revolution. All of these successes would not have been possible without your support, and together we will continue to create a future to believe in.
Our fight has only just begun.
Continue the Revolution


Examples of Blogs – Inspiration for New Bloggers
January 1,2014 by Rami
In this article, I have included a whole load of blog examples from a wide variety of different niches.
Each example listed in this blog post are all different in some way and all bring something unique to their readers & subscribers. I want to show you what is possible and how you can take inspiration from them and create an awesome blog of your own.
Want to Start Your Own Blog?
Remember that it doesn’t cost the earth to start your own blog. You can be up and running for as little as $1.45 per month with Hostinger.


{{#headerPanelMain.condenses}}
You now have:
Looking for more Web App layouts? Check out our layouts collection. You can also preview them live.
This is another card.
[[params.source]]로 인증이 거의 완료되었습니다.
어플리케이션으로 돌아가 다음의 키를 입력하세요:
{{params.token}}
Everything in this repo is BSD style license unless otherwise specified.
Copyright (c) 2015 The Polymer Authors. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.


Data Structures and Algorithms
Some of my data structure work that I've worked on for the past two years. Inverted binary tree upon request.
RespositoryOpTask
OpTask is reimaging how project management can be done. By streamlining the process and giving you a place to keep track of all of your projects, you no longer need to go anywhere else to keep track of your work.
Check it out!Android Utility Application
A mobile application that allows you to browse the web, check the weather, and view the current location of the device.
Google Play Store DownloadReco.io
Recommendation social media application built for Android devices using Java and Google Firebase. APK and App Bundle available upon request.
DemoWeb Development
A Web Development repository that will continue to have new projects committed every 3-4 weeks.
RespositoryJavaScript Asteroids
An implementation of the classic arcade game Asteroids built using vanilla JS.
Play a round!C Command Shell
A homemade command shell written in C that allows you to emulate hardware registers for loading and processing data.
RespositorySeeFood
An iOS application built with xCode and Swift that uses Apple's CoreML machine learning library to determine whether the picture taken by the user is a hot dog or not a hot dog!
Repository