Lipschitz ODE Problem: Proving Inequality for Locally Lipschitz Function

  • Thread starter Thread starter wu_weidong
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lipschitz Ode
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem involving locally Lipschitz functions in the context of ordinary differential equations (ODEs). The original poster presents a specific inequality that needs to be proven, which relates to the behavior of two continuous functions defined on an interval, given certain conditions and assumptions about their integrability and Lipschitz continuity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of Gronwall's inequality and the triangle inequality to derive parts of the inequality. There are attempts to clarify the transition between steps in the reasoning process, particularly regarding the integration and bounding of terms involving the Lipschitz condition.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants seeking clarification on specific steps in the reasoning process. Some have successfully derived parts of the inequality but express uncertainty about the final terms. There is a collaborative effort to explore the implications of Gronwall's inequality and how it applies to the problem at hand.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the need for careful handling of the terms involving the error functions and the Lipschitz constant, as well as the assumptions regarding the integrability of the functions involved. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity of the problem and the necessity of precise mathematical reasoning.

wu_weidong
Messages
27
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Suppose the function f(t,x) is locally Lipschitz on the domain G in R^2, that is, |f(t,x_1)-f(t,x_2)| <= k(t) |x_1 - x_2| for all (t, x_1),(t,x_2) in G. Define I = (a,b) and phi_1(t) and phi_2(t) are 2 continuous functions on I. Assume that, if (t, phi_i(t)) is in G, then the function f(t, phi_i(t)) is an integrable function on I for i = 1, 2. Suppose that for i = 1,2 and t in I,

phi_i(t) = phi_i(t_0) + INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ f(s, phi_i(t)) }ds + E_i(t)

and (phi_1(t_0) - phi_2(t_0)| <= d

for some constant d. Show that for all t in (t_0, b) we have

|phi_1(t) - phi_2(t)| <= d exp(INTEGRATE(from t_0 to t){ k(s) }ds) + E(t) + INTEGRATE(from t_0 to t){ E(s)k(s)exp[INTEGRATE(from t_0 to s) { k(r) } dr] }ds

where E(t) = |E_1(t)| + |E_2(t)|

The Attempt at a Solution



I managed to get d exp(INTEGRATE(from t_0 to t) k(s) ds) using triangle inequality and Gronwall's inequality, but I cannot seem to get the last 2 terms in the inequality.

Here's what I did:

|phi_1(t) - phi_2(t)|
= |phi_1(t_0) + INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ f(s, phi_1(s)) }ds + E_1(t) - phi_2(t_0) - INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ f(s, phi_2(s)) }ds - E_2(t)|
= |phi_1(t_0) - phi_2(t_0) + INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ f(s, phi_1(s)) }ds - INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ f(s, phi_2(s)) }ds + E_1(t) - E_2(t)|
<= |phi_1(t_0) - phi_2(t_0)| + |INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ f(s, phi_1(s)) }ds - INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ f(s, phi_2(s)) }ds + E_1(t) - E_2(t)|
<= d + |E_1(t) - E_2(t)| + |INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ f(s, phi_1(s)) - f(s, phi_2(s)) }ds|
<= d + |E_1(t) - E_2(t)| + INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ |f(s, phi_1(s)) - f(s, phi_2(s))| }ds
<= d + |E_1(t) - E_2(t)| + INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ k(s)|phi_1(s) - phi_2(s)| } ds
<= (d + |E_1(t) - E_2(t)|) exp(INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ k(s) } ds)
= d exp(INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ k(s) } ds) + (|E_1(t) - E_2(t)|) exp(INTEGRATE (from t_0 to t){ k(s) } ds)

This is where I got stuck.

Please help.

Thank you.

Regards,
Rayne
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It would be much easier on the eye if you can re-type your post using [ t e x ] ... [ / t e x ] (single spaced).

If you have not used it before, click on the image to get a very basic starter course: \TeX
 
I rewrote the question in tex.

Suppose the function f(t,x) is locally Lipschitz on the domain G \subset \mathbb{R}^2, that is, |f(t,x_1)-f(t,x_2)| \leq k(t) |x_1 - x_2| for all (t, x_1),(t,x_2) \in G. Define I = (a,b) and \phi_1(t) and \phi_2(t) are 2 continuous functions on I. Assume that, if (t, \phi_i(t)) \in G, then the function f(t, \phi_i(t)) is an integrable function on I for i = 1, 2. Suppose that for i = 1,2 and t \in I,

\phi_i(t) = \phi_i(t_0) + \int^t_{t_0} f(s, \phi_i(s))\,ds + E_i(t)

and |\phi_1(t_0) - \phi_2(t_0)| \leq \delta

for some constant \delta. Show that for all t \in (t_0, b) we have

|\phi_1(t) - \phi_2(t)| \leq \delta e^{\int^t_{t_0} k(s) \,ds} + E(t) + \int^t_{t_0} E(s) k(s) e^{\int^s_{t_0} k(r) \,dr} \,ds

where E(t) = |E_1(t)| + |E_2(t)|

I managed to get \delta e^{\int^t_{t_0} k(s) \,ds} using triangle inequality and Gronwall's inequality, but I cannot seem to get the last 2 terms in the inequality.

Here's what I did:

|\phi_1(t) - \phi_2(t)|
<br /> = |\phi_1(t_0) + \int^t_{t_0} f(s, \phi_1(s)) \,ds + E_1(t) - \phi_2(t_0) - \int^t_{t_0} f(s, \phi_2(s)) \,ds - E_2(t)|
<br /> = |\phi_1(t_0) - \phi_2(t_0) + \int^t_{t_0} f(s, \phi_1(s)) \,ds - \int^t_{t_0} f(s, \phi_2(s)) \,ds + E_1(t) - E_2(t)|
<br /> \leq |\phi_1(t_0) - \phi_2(t_0)| + |\int^t_{t_0} f(s, \phi_1(s)) }ds - \int^t_{t_0} f(s, \phi_2(s)) \,ds + E_1(t) - E_2(t)|
<br /> \leq \delta + |E_1(t) - E_2(t)| + |\int^t_{t_0} f(s, \phi_1(s)) - f(s, \phi_2(s)) \,ds|<br />
<br /> \leq \delta + |E_1(t) + E_2(t)| + \int^t_{t_0} |f(s, \phi_1(s)) - f(s, \phi_2(s))| \,ds<br />
\leq \delta + |E_1(t)| + |E_2(t)| + \int^t_{t_0} k(s)|\phi_1(s) - \phi_2(s)| \, ds
\leq (\delta + E(t)) e^{\int^t_{t_0} k(s)\, ds}
<br /> = \delta e^{\int^t_{t_0} k(s) \, ds} + E(t) e^{\int^t_{t_0} k(s) \, ds

This is where I got stuck.
 
How do you go from
\delta + |E_1(t)| + |E_2(t)| + \int^t_{t_0} k(s)|\phi_1(s) - \phi_2(s)| \, ds
to the next step?
 
EnumaElish said:
How do you go from
\delta + |E_1(t)| + |E_2(t)| + \int^t_{t_0} k(s)|\phi_1(s) - \phi_2(s)| \, ds
to the next step?

|E_1(t)| + |E_2(t)| = E(t)

Taking Gronwall's inequality, that is,
\phi(t) \leq a \int^t_{t_0} \psi(s) \phi(s) \, ds + M,\, \, \, t_0 \leq t \leq t_0 + T

gives for t_0 \leq t \leq t_0 + T

\phi(t) \leq M e^{a \int^t_{t_0} \psi(s) \, ds}

Therefore, taking \delta + E(t) as M, |\phi_1(s) - \phi_2(s)| as \phi(t), and k(s) as \psi(s), I get

(\delta + E(t)) e^{\int^t_{t_0} k(s)\, ds}
 
Is a \int^t_{t_0} \psi(s) \phi(s) \, ds + M equal to M e^{a \int^t_{t_0} \psi(s) \, ds ? My basics is a little rusty.
 
Last edited:
EnumaElish said:
Is a \int^t_{t_0} \psi(s) \phi(s) \, ds + M equal to M e^{a \int^t_{t_0} \psi(s) \, ds ? My basics is a little rusty.

Yes, in the Gronwall's inequality.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K