Bound of Euler method- nonuniform partition

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the error bounds of the Euler method for nonuniform partitions in numerical analysis. It establishes that if the step sizes \( h_n \) satisfy the condition \( \min_{n} h_n > \lambda \max_{n} h_n \) for some \( \lambda > 0 \), then the error can be bounded by the expression \( ||y^n-y(t^n)|| \leq h c_1 \frac{e^{L(t^n-a)}}{2L} \max_{t \in [a,t^n]} ||y^{(2)} (t)|| \). The conversation also clarifies the correct formulation of the Taylor expansion, confirming that the term \( h_n \) should not be squared in the error expression.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Euler's method in numerical analysis
  • Familiarity with Taylor series expansions
  • Knowledge of error analysis in numerical methods
  • Concept of nonuniform partitions in numerical integration
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of error bounds in the Euler method for nonuniform partitions
  • Learn about the implications of step size selection on numerical stability
  • Explore advanced numerical methods such as Runge-Kutta for comparison
  • Investigate the application of Taylor series in deriving numerical method error terms
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, numerical analysts, and students studying numerical methods who are interested in understanding error bounds and the application of the Euler method in nonuniform partitions.

evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hello! (Wave)

Consider a nonuniform partition $a=t_0< t_1< \dots < t_{\nu}=b$ and assume that if $h_n=t^{n+1}-t^n, 0 \leq n \leq N-1 $ is the changeable step, then $\min_{n} h_n > \lambda \max_{n} h_n, \lambda>0$ independent of $n$.
Show a bound of the error of Euler method analogous to

$$||y^n-y(t^n)|| \leq h c_1 \frac{e^{L(t^n-a)}}{2L} \max_{t \in [a,t^n]} ||y^{(2)} (t)||$$

where $h=\max_{n} h_n$.

According to my lecture notes:We will use the following lemma:

Let $\delta$ be a positive number and $K, d_0, d_1, \dots$ non-negative numbers such that

$$d_{i+1} \leq (1+ \delta) d_i+K, i=0,1, \dots$$

Then it holds

$$d_n \leq e^{n \delta} d_0+ K \frac{e^{n \delta}-1}{\delta}, n=0,1,2, \dots$$

$$\left\{\begin{matrix}
y^{n+1}=y^n+h_n f(t^n,y^n) &, n=0,1, \dots, N-1 \\
y^0=y(0) &
\end{matrix}\right.$$

Expanding $y$ with Taylor, we have:

$$y(t^{n+1})=y(t^n)+ h_n y'(t^n)+ \frac{h^2}{2} y''(\xi_n), \xi_n \in (t^n, t^{n+1})$$

From the differential equation we have:

$$y(t^{n+1})=y(t^n)+ h_n f(t^n, y(t^n))+ \frac{h^2}{2} y''(\xi_n), \xi_n \in (t^n, t^{n+1})$$

$$y(t^{n+1})-y^{n+1}=y(t^n)-y^n+h_n [f(t^n, y(t^n))-f(t^n,y^n)]+ \frac{h h_n}{2} y''( \xi_n)$$

$$\epsilon^{n+1}= \epsilon^n+ h_n [f(t^n, y(t^n))-f(t^n,y^n)]+ \frac{h h_n}{2} y''(\xi_n)$$

and so on...

Why is it as follows?

$$y(t^{n+1})=y(t^n)+ h_n y'(t^n)+ \frac{h^2}{2} y''(\xi_n), \xi_n \in (t^n, t^{n+1})$$Shouldn't we have $h_n$ at each point where we have the step, i.e. shouldn't it be as follows?

$$y(t^{n+1})=y(t^n)+ h_n y'(t^n)+ \frac{h_n^2}{2} y''(\xi_n), \xi_n \in (t^n, t^{n+1})$$

Or am I wrong? (Worried)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey! (Mmm)

evinda said:
Shouldn't we have $h_n$ at each point where we have the step, i.e. shouldn't it be as follows?

$$y(t^{n+1})=y(t^n)+ h_n y'(t^n)+ \frac{h_n^2}{2} y''(\xi_n), \xi_n \in (t^n, t^{n+1})$$

Or am I wrong? (Worried)

You're right. Looks like a bit of sloppiness. (Nod)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
990
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
558
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K