Modern trends in the numerical solution of differential equations

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around modern trends in the numerical solution of differential equations, including both ordinary differential equations (ODEs) and partial differential equations (PDEs). Participants explore various methods and tools used in contemporary research and applications.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about the use of traditional methods like Euler's and Runge-Kutta in current research, expressing difficulty in finding accessible literature.
  • Another participant offers to share recent review articles and seeks clarification on whether the focus is on ODEs or more complex PDEs.
  • A participant mentions ODE45, a MATLAB package that employs a refined version of the Runge-Kutta method, highlighting its adaptability in step size and user-defined error tolerances.
  • Discussion shifts to the use of boundary element methods (BEM) for solving large systems of differential equations, noting a trend away from finite difference and finite element methods (FEM) due to advancements in computational capabilities.
  • Advantages of BEM include the ability to solve exterior problems exactly and faster convergence rates, while challenges include the difficulty of converting differential equations into integral equations.
  • Another participant agrees with the advantages of BEM but points out that FEM remains preferable for problems involving nonlinearities, mentioning the rise of meshfree methods like element free Galerkin as a solution for complex problems.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying opinions on the effectiveness of different numerical methods, particularly between BEM and FEM, indicating that no consensus exists on the best approach for all scenarios.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations related to the complexity of problems being addressed, the need for specific conditions in method applicability, and the challenges in converting equations between forms.

mooberrymarz
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
:cry: I have an essay to write on modern trends in the numerical solution of differential equations. Most of the journals I've been reading are quite hectic and higher grade for me. ^^,

Neway, if anybody knows of any good articlkes that i could read that would be great. Do ppl still use eulers and runge kutta's methods? thanx. Really appreciate it. !1
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok, I might be able to point you to a couple of recent review articles or some related matter ... or give my own impression of what is used :biggrin: . A point of clarification though : are you focusing on ODEs and "simplistic" applications or "real-life" research problems, meaning a bit more complex PDEs and so forth ?
 
one of the most popular is called ODE45. This is a package that is used in MATLAB and SIMULINK. Try looking up ODE45 on google. I believe it uses a smart version of the runge kutta method. By smart I mean that it knows how the adjust the step size so that it computes a solution quick but remains within a certain degree of accuracy. Many of the relative and absolute error tolerance can be user defined and it is a very reliable and accurate solver. All the user has to do is write a function that contains the DE's in state variable form and run the ODE45 command with the specified initial conditions and the time interval of the simulation
 
My comments are specifically aimed at solving huge systems of (partial) differential equations which arise in modeling of physical systems. I doubt this applies if you're just trying to solve a single equation.

I think there is a trend towards using boundary element methods over finite difference or finite element methods. This means you turn your differential equation into an integral equation and solve that instead. For a long time people liked FEM and FDM because they generated sparse matrices which are easy to solve, as opposed to BEM which ALWAYS generate dense matrices. But now there are fast-solvers and better computers which can handle dense matrices much easier, so BEM are becoming more practical.

Advantages of BEM are that you can solve exterior problems 'exactly', whereas the other methods require some sort of truncation of your mesh. Also, BEM often converge spectrally (exponentially), which is much faster than the average FE method. The downside to them is that it's sometimes difficult/impossible to turn the differential equation into an integral equation.
 
Yeah, I'm inclined to agree what comes to BEM ... although have to say that when bumping into problems involving nonlinearities FEM is still a preferable choice and BEM faces problems. Although there are ways to tackle these issues. One added group of methods I'm seeing on the rise are meshfree methods, such as element free Galerkin, which have enabled analyses of problems overly difficult even for adaptive FEM & BEM.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
10K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K