What Are the Conditions for Uniqueness in Nonlinear Differential Systems?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter LeBrad
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Existence Uniqueness
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conditions for uniqueness in solutions to nonlinear differential systems, specifically examining the implications of Lipschitz continuity in the context of transformations between coordinate systems. Participants explore the mathematical requirements for establishing uniqueness in solutions when applying nonlinear changes of coordinates.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that if the function f(x) is Lipschitz continuous, then a unique q(x) can be derived, provided q(x) is invertible.
  • Another participant questions the correctness of their earlier assertion and seeks to demonstrate the Lipschitz condition of f(x) with respect to q(x) through mathematical derivations involving inverse functions.
  • A different participant highlights the relationship between q(x) and x, noting that the derivative of q with respect to x must be non-zero or invertible to avoid singular systems.
  • One participant expresses a preference to maintain the form of the equation as \dot{q}(x) = f(x) rather than transforming it into another form, despite acknowledging the potential simplifications that could arise from such transformations.
  • Another participant argues that proving Lipschitz continuity for \hat{f}(x) is simpler and suggests that maintaining the original form of the equation does not significantly alter the nature of the problem, while also mentioning the complexities introduced by singular systems.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and implications of transforming the equation into different forms. There is no consensus on the best approach to proving uniqueness or the conditions required for Lipschitz continuity in the context of nonlinear differential systems.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the need for additional assumptions when dealing with general nonlinear differential systems, particularly in relation to singular systems and the properties of the involved functions.

LeBrad
Messages
214
Reaction score
0
I am familiar with the existence and uniqueness of solutions to the system

[tex]\dot{x} = f(x)[/tex]

requiring [tex]f(x)[/tex] to be Lipschitz continuous, but I am wondering what the conditions are for the system

[tex]\dot{q}(x) = f(x)[/tex].

It seems like I could make the same argument for there existing a unique [tex]q(x)[/tex] provided [tex]f(x)[/tex] is Lipschitz with respect to [tex]q(x)[/tex]. Then if [tex]q(x)[/tex] is invertible or one-to-one or whatever the proper math term is, then I can get a unique [tex]x[/tex]. Is that correct? If that's the case it looks like I'm just doing a nonlinear change of coordinates, showing uniqueness in that coordinate system, and then having a unique map back to the original coordinate system.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok, since nobody complained I'm going to assume what I said is correct. In that case, I want to show Lipschitzness of f(x) with respect to q(x). If I define [itex]\tilde{x} = q(x)[/itex] and assume f is Lipschitz with respect to x, then

[tex]||f(x_1)-f(x_2)||\leq L ||x_1 - x_2|| = L ||q^{-1}(\tilde{x}_1) - q^{-1}(\tilde{x}_2)||[/tex].

So if [itex]q^{-1}(\tilde{x})[/itex] is Lipschitz with respect to [tex]\tilde{x}[/itex],<br /> <br /> [tex]||q^{-1}(\tilde{x}_1) - q^{-1}(\tilde{x}_2)|| \leq M||\tilde{x}_1 - \tilde{x}_2||[/tex],<br /> <br /> then <br /> <br /> [tex]||f(x_1)-f(x_2)||\leq LM ||\tilde{x}_1 - \tilde{x}_2||[/tex].<br /> <br /> So it seems it is sufficient to show that f(x) is Lipschitz with respect to x and that [itex]q^{-1}(\tilde{x})[/itex] is Lipschitz with respect to [tex]\tilde{x}[/itex]. Does that look correct?[/tex][/tex]
 
Keep in mind that

[tex]\dot{q}(x) = \frac{\partial q}{\partial x}\dot{x}= f(x)[/tex]

If nonzero or invertible in general (otherwise you have what is called a singular or descriptor system), [tex]\frac{\partial q}{\partial x}[/tex] is also a function of [tex]x[/tex] might be carried to the other side and you have another [tex]\dot{x} = \hat{f}(x)[/tex]
 
Yeah, I know I can do that, but I was trying to keep that as a last resort. I have reason to keep it in the form
[tex]\dot{q}(x) = f(x)[/tex]
if possible.
 
Yes, but proving if the [tex]\hat{f}(x)[/tex] is Lipschitz, is much more easier. Then you can say, OK now we multiply the differential equation from the left with some non-vanishing function [tex]h(x)[/tex] and then take
[tex]h(x)=\frac{\partial g}{\partial x}[/tex]

What I am trying to say is you have a point there, but it does not bring much difference into the problem nature. But, if you can prove that without inverting the function, then you have a nice result. Such as analyzing the properties of the linear singular system

[tex]E \dot{x} = Ax[/tex]

where E is not invertible. People usually dive into the problem by saying that the pencil [tex]\lambda E - A[/tex] is regular, does not have impulsive modes etc. You will definitely need some more assumptions to handle that issue when it becomes a general nonlinear differential system.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K