A Memory issues in numerical integration of oscillatory function

cyberpotato
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Memory challenges in numerically integrating oscillatory functions using FFT in Python. Starting this thread here as a related thread was discussed earlier: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/numerical-integration-fourier-transform-or-brute-force.283916/#post-2030214
Hello!

I need to numerically integrate a frequently oscillating, decaying complex function over the interval from 0 to infinity, which is continuous. For brevity, I provide the general integral view
$$\int_{0}^{\infty} A(t)e^{e^{iw't}}dt$$.
I'm using Python libraries for this task. Initially, I tried the quadrature method, but encountered convergence issues when integrating over a large interval. To address this, I started subdividing the integration interval into subintervals, integrating them separately, and summing the results until convergence. However, this process was time-consuming.
To speed up the integration, I switched to using the fast Fourier transform (FFT) from scipy.fft. While this approach improved integration speed, a new issue arose. When passing a vector of function values to scipy.fft, I faced memory constraints for very large integration intervals with small step sizes. To solve this, I considered subdividing the large integration interval, performing FFT on each subinterval, and summing the results until convergence.

Is it correct to solve this issue by breaking down the large integration interval into subintervals, performing FFT on each subinterval, and summing until convergence? Additionally, are there alternative methods for integrating such functions that I should consider?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It may be worth setting <br /> I_n = \int_{0}^{2\pi/\omega&#039;} A\left(\frac{2n\pi}{\omega&#039;} + t\right)e^{e^{i\omega&#039;t}}\,dt, \qquad n \geq 0 and seeing how fast |I_n| decays with n. Your integral can then be approximated as \sum_{n=0}^N I_n for some N.
 
I think what you are asking is that you have,
$$
\int_0^{\infty} A(t)[1 + e^{i\omega t}+ \frac{e^{2i\omega t}}{2!} +\frac{e^{3i\omega t}}{3!} + ...]dt
$$
and wish to take the FFT of your time series against each succeeding term in the expansion. Firstly, you must apply the scaling theorem for FFTs to each term (see Scaling Theorem )which will probably result in interpolation issues which you must resolve. Secondly, by breaking up your time series into segments and taking the FFT of each segment Gibbs oscillations raise their ugly heads. Therefore you must window each segment using a Hamming window or whatnot.
 
  • Informative
Likes pbuk and Delta2
pasmith said:
It may be worth setting <br /> I_n = \int_{0}^{2\pi/\omega&#039;} A\left(\frac{2n\pi}{\omega&#039;} + t\right)e^{e^{i\omega&#039;t}}\,dt, \qquad n \geq 0 and seeing how fast |I_n| decays with n. Your integral can then be approximated as \sum_{n=0}^N I_n for some N.
Your approach looks very interesting, thank you. I'm trying to understand it. Are you using the periodicity property of the exp(iωt) function? In the case A(t) = 1, the integral will have the form:
$$\int_{0}^{\infty }e^{e^{i\omega t}}=\sum_{n=0}^N \int_{0}^{2\pi/\omega}e^{e^{i\omega t}}$$
Is that right?
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Back
Top