Maximizing a functional when the Euler-Lagrange equation's solution violates ICs

In summary: I think really, the best way to solve this is to take the easy route and note that by the symmetry of the problem the solution must be of the formf(t) = 1 + A\int_t^\infty d\tau e^{-\tau}(\tau f'(\tau) - f(\tau))^2as your integrand will have derivatives occur in pairs with opposite signs, so will automatically integrate to zero without the need for a boundary term. Then just minimize that function. It's pretty obvious that the solution will be A = 1/2 from that, but I have not checked this numerically. In summary, The conversation is about trying to minimize a specific integral by choosing a function f that satisfies
  • #1
cfp
10
0
Hi,

I am trying to minimize:

[tex]
\int_0^\infty{\exp(-t)(t\,f'(t)-f(t))^2\,dt}
[/tex]

by choice of [tex]f[/tex], subject to [tex]f(0)=1[/tex] and [tex]f'(x)>0[/tex] for all [tex]x[/tex].

The (real) solution to the Euler-Lagrange differential equation is:

[tex]
f(t)={C_1}t
[/tex]

rather unsurprisingly. However, this violates [tex]f(0)=1[/tex].

If we constrain to solutions of the form:

[tex]
f(t)=1+t^p
[/tex]

then numerical optimisation puts [tex]p=1.2848\cdots[/tex] at which point the target is [tex]0.6327\cdots[/tex].

Is it possible to solve this problem without restricting to a particular solution form?

Thanks in advance,

Tom
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I found the solution to be c1 + c2t.
 
  • #3
Oh wait, i was wrong. But there has to be another solution, since the euler lagrange equation will be second order
 
  • #4
Do you have a complex solution as well? That solution will be accompanied by a complex constant so you cannot disregard it
 
  • #5
Yeah there are two constants and the second one multiplies something complex (and messy). There's no reason you can't set the second constant to zero to the best of my knowledge.

In any case, whatever the values of those constants, it won't be the case that f(0)=1.
 
  • #6
You cannot set it equal to zero. You must solve it from the initial values. Try it, youll see that it works

Regards
 
  • #7
I get that the limit of the general solution as t -> 0 is signum(C2)*infinity where C2 is the constant on the messy complex part. Clearly you can't satisfy the initial conditions...
 
  • #8
Please state the general solution you have. If you cannot satisfy the initial conditions with that, you will have to settle with some constrained function.
 
  • #9
The full solution is:

[tex]
C_1\,t+C_2\,\frac{Ei(1,-t)\,t^3+(2+t+t^2)\,\exp{t}}{t^2}
[/tex]

where [tex]Ei(a,z)=z^{(a-1)} \,\Gamma{(1-a,z)}[/tex].
 
  • #10
No solution can satisfy the initial condition f(0) = 1. The differential equation you're trying to solve is

[tex]t^2 f''(t) - (t-2)(t f'(t) - f(t)) = 0,[/tex]

right? At t=0, this reduces to -2 f(0) = 0, and hence it can only be the case that a solution to the DE which includes the point t = 0 will necessarily have f(0) = 0.

Compare to the case of Bessel's Equation:

[tex]x^2 y'' + xy' + (x^2-n^2)y = 0[/tex]
has a regular singular point at x = 0. Note that for [itex]n \neq 0[/itex] all the solutions [itex]J_n(x)[/itex] have [itex]J_n(0) = 0[/itex], as at x = 0 the DE reduces to [itex]-n^2y(0) = 0[/itex]. At n = 0 we get 0 = 0 so [itex]J_0(x)[/itex] may take on any finite value at x = 0. The other independent solution of course diverges at the origin and may not be included in a solution which contains x = 0 as a valid point.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Yeah I know the differential equation doesn't have a solution satisfying the initial condition.

The question I was asking in the first message is how you go about minimizing that functional given this.
 
  • #12
You could enforce your initial condition by adding a Lagrange multiplier, perhaps. You would then need to minimize the functional

[tex]S[f(t)] = \int_{0-}^\infty dt e^{-t} (tf'(t) - f(t))^2 - \lambda \left[f(0) - 1].[/tex]

Writing [itex]f(0) - 1 = \int_{0-}^\infty dt (f(t) - 1)\delta(t)[/itex] you can combine terms into one integral. Minimizing then gives you

[tex]e^{-t}\left[t^2 f''(t) + (2-t)(t f'(t) - f(t))\right] + \frac{\lambda}{2}\delta(t) = 0,[/tex]

which you can now solve. Note that I specified that your integration limit is actually slightly less than zero in order for the delta function to give you a non-zero value when integrated over that range. However, if t is restricted to being zero or greater this may be a shifty thing to do; you could get around it by having the delta function contribute to an integral at some other point, but the cost of doing so is that you would then have a differential equation for f at different points in time, which I believe would be much harder to solve.

Plus, I don't know if you could get a unique solution, as differentiating the functional with respect to lambda will only give you your desired initial condition.
 
  • #13
Nice idea to enforce the initial condition. I suspect however that would result in a discontinious solution at the origin, with -infinity slope, while a positive slope is required. The curve f=Ct will make the always positive integrand zero, so you might want to consider a D1 curve such in connecting the initial value to f = Ct in some small interval.

Regards.
 
  • #14
Yes, I'm also not sure it would give a satisfactory solution due to the discontinuity being a boundary point. If one sets

[tex]f(0)-1 = \int_{0}^\infty dt (f(t-\xi) - 1)\delta(t-\xi),[/tex]
to get around that problem then I don't even think one could combine the multiplier term with the original integral to get one differential equation - the two terms would have to vanish separately, which of course just reduces to the original attempt at the problem.
 

1. What does it mean for the Euler-Lagrange equation's solution to violate initial conditions (ICs)?

When the solution to the Euler-Lagrange equation violates initial conditions, it means that the values of the dependent variables at the starting point do not match the given initial conditions. This can occur when the solution does not satisfy the boundary conditions or when there is an error in the calculation of the initial conditions.

2. How does this violation of ICs affect the maximization of a functional?

This violation can significantly impact the maximization of a functional as it can lead to incorrect solutions or even make the problem unsolvable. The solution to the Euler-Lagrange equation must satisfy the initial conditions to accurately maximize the functional.

3. What are some common methods for dealing with the violation of ICs in maximizing a functional?

One method is to adjust the boundary conditions to match the given initial conditions. Another approach is to use a different set of initial conditions that are closer to the solution. Additionally, some numerical methods can be used to iteratively solve for a more accurate solution that satisfies the initial conditions.

4. Can the violation of ICs be avoided altogether in the maximization of a functional?

In some cases, it is possible to avoid the violation of ICs by carefully choosing the functional and the initial conditions. However, in more complex problems, it may be unavoidable, and special techniques must be used to handle it.

5. What are the consequences of ignoring the violation of ICs in maximizing a functional?

If the violation of ICs is not addressed, it can lead to incorrect solutions and render the functional maximization meaningless. In some cases, it may also result in physical inconsistencies or instability in the solution.

Similar threads

  • Differential Equations
Replies
1
Views
770
Replies
1
Views
939
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
988
  • Differential Equations
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
853
  • Differential Equations
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
878
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
471
Replies
8
Views
2K
Back
Top