Is there a general method for solving Fredholm integral equations?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on solving Fredholm integral equations, specifically the first kind, as presented in a thesis research context. The equation involves a known kernel function K and an unknown probability distribution P, constrained by normalization conditions. Participants explore the challenges of finding P given the scalar constant C and the implications of K's dependence on multiple variables. They propose transforming the integral equation into a differential equation for easier handling and discuss the underdetermined nature of the problem.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Fredholm integral equations, particularly the first kind.
  • Familiarity with probability distributions and normalization conditions.
  • Knowledge of differential equations and their transformations.
  • Basic calculus, including integration and differentiation techniques.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research numerical methods for solving Fredholm integral equations.
  • Explore analytic solutions for specific cases of Fredholm integral equations.
  • Learn about transforming integral equations into differential equations.
  • Investigate the properties of probability distributions in the context of integral equations.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, researchers in applied mathematics, and graduate students working on integral equations or related fields will benefit from this discussion.

LeonhardEuler
Gold Member
Messages
858
Reaction score
1
Hello Everyone. An interesting equation has come in my thesis research, and I was wondering whether anyone had any useful information about it. It is this equation:
\int_{a_1}^{b_1}...\int_{a_n}^{b_n}P(x_1,...x_n)K(x_1,...x_n,s_1...s_n)dx_1...dx_n=C
K is a known function of the x's and s's. C is an unknown constant. P is a probability distribution and so subject to
\int_{a_1}^{b_1}...\int_{a_n}^{b_n}P(x_1,...x_n)dx_1...dx=1
P(x_1,...x_n)\ge 0
The goal is to find P. I found this Wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredholm_integral_equation
So I see that this is a Fredholm integral equation of the first kind. However, none of the theorems they present have any clear relevance to helping solve this equation, and there is nothing about how to impose the probability conditions.

It would be great if there was a general method for a numerical solution of these equations, and it would be good to know about analytic solutions in certain cases. A general analytic solution is probably too much to hope for. A way to transform this to a differential equation would also be good, since I know more about those.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm a little confused at this specific equation; are you sure C is a constant and not dependent on s1, s2, ... sn? If you are, then how can K depend on s1, s2, ... sn?
 
MikeyW said:
I'm a little confused at this specific equation; are you sure C is a constant and not dependent on s1, s2, ... sn? If you are, then how can K depend on s1, s2, ... sn?

Yes, I am sure, and this is a question I get from a lot of people I have shown this to. Here is an example of a solution to the equation in one dimension:
F(x,s)=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi}}\frac{(b-a)e^{-\frac{(x-s)^2}{2\sigma^2}}}{\sigma[erf(\frac{s-a}{\sqrt{2}\sigma})+erf(\frac{b-s}{\sqrt{2}\sigma})]}
P(x)=\frac{1}{b-a}
C=1
Given any K and P that don't solve the problem because they give f(s) instead of C, you can always generate a solved version of the problem (though not the one you are trying to solve) by dividing K by f(s).
 
I think you've lost me, what's F, a, b?

The last sentence also went over my head; am I right in saying that because C is a constant, dK/ds1 = dK/ds2 = ... = dK/dsn = 0? I don't think you'd be asking if it were, but I can't comprehend how the RHS is constant yet the LHS depends on a set of variables.

On a more fundamental level, it seems like you have a very large space of unknowns (a continuous function P) and a single scalar known value C. It would seem to be vastly underdetermined.
 
MikeyW said:
I think you've lost me, what's F, a, b?

The last sentence also went over my head; am I right in saying that because C is a constant, dK/ds1 = dK/ds2 = ... = dK/dsn = 0? And your problem is essentially an integral? I don't think you'd be asking if it were, but I can't comprehend how the RHS is constant yet the LHS depends on a set of variables.

Really sorry about that. I meant
K(x,s)=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi}}\frac{(b-a)e^{-\frac{(x-s)^2}{2\sigma^2}}}{\sigma[erf(\frac{s-a}{\sqrt{2}\sigma})+erf(\frac{b-s}{\sqrt{2}\sigma})]}
And a and b are the limits of integration in the original problem, with the subscripts dropped because this is a 1D case.

Let me clarify what I meant before with the last sentence. Suppose
\int_{a_1}^{b_1}...\int_{a_n}^{b_n}P(x_1,...x_n)K(x_1,...x_n,s_1...s_n) dx_1...dx_n=f(s_1,...s_n)
Then define
K_{new}(x_1,...x_n,s_1,...s_n)=\frac{K(x_1,...x_n,s_1,...s_n)}{f(s_1,...s_n)}
Then
\int_{a_1}^{b_1}...\int_{a_n}^{b_n}P(x_1,...x_n)K_{new}(x_1,...x_n,s_1...s_n) dx_1...dx_n=1
From this you see that the derivatives of K with respect to the s variables are not necessarily 0. Unless I'm still unclear. Thanks for taking the time to look at this.
 
Also, here is another simple example of the same counter intuitive kind of thing. Suppose
\int_{0}^{\infty}f(x,s)dx=1
for all s>0. You might think that
\frac{\partial f}{\partial s}=0
But suppose
f(x,s)=se^{-sx}
Then
\int_{0}^{\infty}se^{-sx}dx=1
but
\frac{\partial f}{\partial s}=-s^2e^{-sx}+e^{-sx}
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 125 ·
5
Replies
125
Views
20K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K