Oscillation of Runge-Kutta methods for advanced impulsive differential equations with piecewise constant arguments
- Gui-Lai Zhang^{1}Email author
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-016-1067-0
© The Author(s) 2017
Received: 20 October 2016
Accepted: 22 December 2016
Published: 27 January 2017
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to study oscillation of Runge-Kutta methods for linear advanced impulsive differential equations with piecewise constant arguments. We obtain conditions of oscillation and nonoscillation for Runge-Kutta methods. Moreover, we prove that the oscillation of the exact solution is preserved by the θ-methods. It turns out that the zeros of the piecewise linear interpolation functions of the numerical solution converge to the zeros of the exact solution. We give some numerical examples to confirm the theoretical results.
Keywords
1 Introduction
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the results about oscillation of the exact solutions of (1.1) in [6] are introduced. In Section 3, the conditions of oscillation and nonoscillation for Runge-Kutta methods are obtained. In Section 4, the conditions of oscillation and nonoscillation for θ-methods are obtained. Moreover, it is proved that the oscillation of the exact solution is preserved by the θ-methods. It turns out that the zeros of the piecewise linear interpolation functions of the numerical solution converge to the zeros of the exact solution with the order of accuracy 1 (\(\theta\neq\frac{1}{2}\)) and 2 (\(\theta=\frac{1}{2}\)). In the last section, two simple numerical examples are given to confirm the theoretical results.
2 Preliminaries
Definition 2.1
- (1)
\(x:[0,\infty)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) is continuous for \(t\in [0,+\infty)\) with the possible exception of the points \([t]\in[ 0, \infty)\),
- (2)
\(x(t)\) is right continuous and has left-hand limit at the points \([t]\in[ 0, \infty)\),
- (3)
\(x(t)\) is differentiable and satisfies \(x'(t)+ax(t)+bx([t])+cx([t+1])=0\) for any \(t\in\mathbb{R}^{+}\) with the possible exception of the points \([t]\in[ 0, \infty)\) where one-sided derivatives exist,
- (4)
\(x(n)\) satisfies \(\Delta x(n)=d x(n)\) for \(n\in\mathbb{N}\) and \(x(0)=x_{0}\).
Theorem 2.2
Definition 2.3
See [6]
The solution \(x(t)\) of (1.1) is said to be oscillatory if there exist two real-valued sequences \((t_{n})_{n\geq0}, (t'_{n})_{n\geq 0} \subseteq[0,\infty)\) such that \(t_{n}\rightarrow\infty\), \(t'_{n}\rightarrow\infty\) as \(n\rightarrow\infty\) and \(x(t_{n})\leq0\leq x(t'_{n})\) for \(n\geq N\) with N sufficiently large. Otherwise, the solution is called nonoscillatory.
3 Runge-Kutta methods
3.1 Oscillation of Runge-Kutta methods
Definition 3.1
A nontrivial solution \(x_{n}\) of (3.1)-(3.2) is said to be oscillatory if there exists a sequence \(n_{k}\) such that \(n_{k}\rightarrow \infty\) as \(k\rightarrow\infty\) and \(x_{n_{k}}x_{n_{k+1}}\leq0\); otherwise, it is called nonoscillatory. We say that the Runge-Kutta method (3.1)-(3.2) for (1.1) is oscillatory if all the nontrivial solutions of (3.1)-(3.2) are oscillatory; we say that the Runge-Kutta method (3.1)-(3.2) for (1.1) is non-oscillatory if all the nontrivial solutions of (3.1)-(3.2) are nonoscillatory.
Definition 3.2
We say that the Runge-Kutta method preserves oscillations of (1.1) if (1.1) oscillates and there is \(h_{0}\) such that (3.1)-(3.2) oscillates for \(h< h_{0}\).
Theorem 3.3
Proof
Lemma 3.4
Lemma 3.5
- (i)
\(R(z)<\mathrm{e}^{z}\) for all \(z>0\) if and only if k is even,
- (ii)
\(R(z)>\mathrm{e}^{z}\) for \(0< z<\eta\) if and only if k is odd;
- (i)
\(R(z)> \mathrm{e}^{z}\) for all \(z<0\) if and only if j is even,
- (ii)
\(R(z)<\mathrm{e}^{z}\) for \(\varsigma< z<0\) if and only if j is odd,
Theorem 3.6
- (1)
\(a<0\), and k is odd for \(h=\frac{1}{m}<\min\{\frac{\eta }{-a},\frac{\delta_{2}}{-a}\}\);
- (2)
\(a>0\), and j is odd for \(h=\frac{1}{m}<\min\{\frac{\zeta }{-a},\frac{\delta_{1}}{-a}\}\).
Proof
3.2 Nonoscillation of Runge-Kutta methods
Lemma 3.7
- (1)
\(a<0\), and k is even for \(h=\frac{1}{m}<-\frac{\delta_{2}}{a}\);
- (2)
\(a>0\), and j is even for \(h=\frac{1}{m}<-\frac{\delta_{1}}{a}\).
Proof
Lemma 3.8
- (1)
\(f(x)\) is decreasing if \(a<0\);
- (2)
\(f(x)\) is increasing if \(a>0\).
Proof
- (1)
\(f(x)\) is decreasing if \(a<0\),
- (2)
\(f(x)\) is increasing if \(a>0\).
Theorem 3.9
- (1)
\(a<0\), and k is even for \(h=\frac{1}{m}<-\frac{\delta_{2}}{a}\);
- (2)
\(a>0\), and j is even for \(h=\frac{1}{m}<-\frac{\delta_{1}}{a}\).
Proof
4 Piecewise linear interpolation of θ-methods
4.1 Oscillation of θ-methods
Lemma 4.1
- (i)for \(a>0\),$$\begin{aligned}& \biggl(1+\frac{z}{1-z\theta}\biggr)^{m}\geq\mathrm{e}^{-a} \quad \textit{if and only if}\quad \varphi(-1)\leq\theta\leq1, \\& \biggl(1+\frac{z}{1-z\theta}\biggr)^{m}\leq\mathrm{e}^{-a} \quad \textit{if and only if}\quad 0\leq\theta\leq\frac{1}{2}; \end{aligned}$$
- (ii)for \(a<0\),where \(\varphi(x)=\frac{1}{x} -\frac{1}{\mathrm{e}^{x}-1}\).$$\begin{aligned}& \biggl(1+\frac{z}{1-z\theta}\biggr)^{m}\geq\mathrm{e}^{-a} \quad \textit{if and only if}\quad \frac{1}{2} \leq\theta\leq1, \\& \biggl(1+\frac{z}{1-z\theta}\biggr)^{m}\leq\mathrm{e}^{-a} \quad \textit{if and only if}\quad 0\leq\theta\leq\varphi(1), \end{aligned}$$
Applying Lemma 4.1, we can obtain the following two results.
Theorem 4.2
- (1)
\(\frac{1}{2} \leq\theta\leq1\) and \(a<0\) for \(h=\frac{1}{m}\), \(m>-a\);
- (2)
\(0 \leq\theta\leq\frac{1}{2}\) and \(a>0\) for \(h=\frac{1}{m}\), \(m>a\).
Theorem 4.3
- (1)
\(0 \leq\theta\leq\varphi(1)\) and \(a<0\) for \(h=\frac{1}{m}\), \(m>-a\);
- (2)
\(\varphi(-1) \leq\theta\leq1\) and \(a>0\) for \(h=\frac{1}{m}\), \(m>a\).
4.2 Piecewise linear interpolation of θ-methods
Theorem 4.4
- (1)
\(x(k)x(k+1)<0\);
- (2)
\(x(t)\) has at most one zero at \([k,k+1]\).
Proof
Theorem 4.5
- (1)
\(\bar{x}(t)-x(t)=O(h)\) (\(\theta\neq\frac{1}{2}\)), \(\bar {x}(t)-x(t)=O(h^{2})\) (\(\theta=\frac{1}{2}\));
- (2)
\(\bar{x}(t)\) has at most one zero in \([k,k+1]\) for any integer k.
Proof
In the following, we will prove that \(M\neq0\).
Consequently, \(x_{k,0}=x_{k+1,0}=0\), which implies \(\bar{x}_{k}(t)\equiv 0\), which is a contradiction to part (1) of the theorem. Hence, \(\bar {x}_{k}(t)\) has at most one zero in \([k,k+1]\), which implies \(\bar{x}(t)\) has at most one zero in \([k,k+1]\) for any integer k. □
Theorem 4.6
- (1)
\(\bar{x}(\bar{t})=0\); moreover, \(t-\bar{t}=O(h)\) (\(\theta\neq \frac{1}{2}\)), \(t-\bar{t}=O(h^{2})\) (\(\theta=\frac{1}{2}\));
- (2)\(\bar{x}(t)\) intersects the axis of abscissas at t̄, that is, \(\bar{x}(\bar{t})=0\),
- (i)
\(\bar{x}(k+(l+1)h)\bar{x}(k+(l-1)h)<0\) for \(\bar{t}=k+lh\),
- (ii)
\(\bar{x}(k+(l+1)h)\bar{x}(k+lh)<0\) for \(\bar{t}=k+(l+\mu)h\) (\(0<\mu<1\)).
- (i)
Proof
5 Numerical experiments
Example 5.1
Preservation of oscillation for six methods
Gauss-Legendre | Radau IA, IIA | Lobatto IIIA, IIIB | Lobatto IIIC | |
---|---|---|---|---|
(v,v) | (v − 1,v) | (v − 1,v − 1) | (v − 2,v) | |
a<0 | v is odd | v is odd | v is even | v is odd |
a>0 | v is odd | v is even | v is even | v is odd |
Preservation of nonoscillation for six methods
Gauss-Legendre | Radau IA, IIA | Lobatto IIIA, IIIB | Lobatto IIIC | |
---|---|---|---|---|
(v,v) | (v − 1,v) | (v − 1,v − 1) | (v − 2,v) | |
a<0 | v is even | v is even | v is odd | v is even |
a>0 | v is even | v is odd | v is odd | v is even |
Example 5.2
The errors of the first zero between numerical solutions and exact solution of ( 5.2 )
m | Explicit Euler | Trapezoidal rule | Implicit Euler | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AE | RE | AE | RE | AE | RE | |
100 | 0.0020 | 0.0025 | 9.1599e − 06 | 1.1672e − 05 | 0.0020 | 0.0025 |
200 | 9.9290e − 04 | 0.0013 | 2.2900e − 06 | 2.9180e − 06 | 9.9369e − 04 | 0.0013 |
400 | 4.9657e − 04 | 6.3277e − 04 | 5.7249e − 07 | 7.2951e − 07 | 4.9673e − 04 | 6.3296e − 04 |
800 | 2.4833e − 04 | 3.1644e − 04 | 1.4312e − 07 | 1.8238e − 07 | 2.4832e − 04 | 3.1643e − 04 |
1,600 | 1.2418e − 04 | 1.5824e − 04 | 3.3076e − 08 | 4.2148e − 08 | 1.2421e − 04 | 1.5828e − 04 |
3,200 | 6.2108e − 05 | 7.9142e − 05 | 8.2691e − 09 | 1.0537e − 08 | 6.2109e − 05 | 7.9144e − 05 |
Ratio | 1.9992 | 1.9992 | 4.0654 | 4.0654 | 2.0009 | 2.0009 |
The errors of the third zero between numerical solutions and exact solution of ( 5.2 )
m | Explicit Euler | Trapezoidal rule | Implicit Euler | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AE | RE | AE | RE | AE | RE | |
100 | 0.0020 | 7.1229e − 04 | 9.1599e − 06 | 3.2893e − 06 | 0.0020 | 7.1532e − 04 |
200 | 9.9290e − 04 | 3.5655e − 04 | 2.2900e − 06 | 8.2233e − 07 | 9.9369e − 04 | 3.5683e − 04 |
400 | 4.9657e − 04 | 1.7832e − 04 | 5.1768e − 07 | 1.8590e − 07 | 4.9673e − 04 | 1.7837e − 04 |
800 | 2.4833e − 04 | 8.9173e − 05 | 6.8482e − 08 | 2.4592e − 08 | 2.4832e − 04 | 8.9172e − 05 |
1,600 | 1.2418e − 04 | 4.4594e − 05 | 3.3076e − 08 | 1.1878e − 08 | 1.2421e − 04 | 4.4604e − 05 |
3,200 | 6.2108e − 05 | 2.2303e − 05 | 5.6725e − 09 | 2.0370e − 09 | 6.2109e − 05 | 2.2303e − 05 |
Ratio | 1.9992 | 1.9992 | 4.7769 | 4.7769 | 2.0009 | 2.0009 |
Declarations
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the referees for their helpful comments and suggestions. This work is supported by the Natural Science Foundations of Hebei Province A2015501130, the Research Project of Higher School Science and Technology in Hebei province ZD2015211,the Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities N152304007 and the Youth Science Foundations of Heilongjiang Province QC2016001.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Authors’ Affiliations
References
- Cooke, KL, Wiener, J: Retarded differential equations with piecewise constant delays. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 99, 265-297 (1984) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Wiener, J: Generalized Solutions of Functional Differential Equations. World Scientific, Singapore (1994) Google Scholar
- Ding, XH, Wu, KN, Liu, MZ: The Euler scheme and its convergence for impulsive delay differential equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 216, 1566-1570 (2010) MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- Wu, KN, Ding, XH: Convergence and stability of Euler method for impulsive stochastic delay differential equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 229, 151-158 (2014) MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Wu, KN, Ding, XH: Impulsive stabilization of delay difference equations and its application in Nicholson’s blowflies model. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2012, 88 (2012). doi:10.1186/1687-1847-2012-88 MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Bereketoglu, H, Seyhan, G, Ogun, A: Advanced impulsive differential equations with piecewise constant arguments. Math. Model. Anal. 15, 175-187 (2010) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Zhang, GL, Song, MH: Asymptotical stability of Runge-Kutta methods for advanced linear impulsive differential equations with piecewise constant arguments. Appl. Math. Comput. 259, 831-837 (2015) MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Butcher, JC: The Numerical Analysis of Ordinary Differential Equations: Runge-Kutta and General Linear Methods. Wiley, New York (1987) MATHGoogle Scholar
- Dekker, K, Verwer, JG: Stability of Runge-Kutta Methods for Stiff Nonlinear Differential Equations. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1984) MATHGoogle Scholar
- Hairer, E, Nørsett, SP, Wanner, G: Solving Ordinary Differential Equations II: Stiff and Differential Algebraic Problems. Springer, New York (1993) MATHGoogle Scholar
- Wanner, G, Hairer, E, Nørsett, SP: Order stars and stability theorems. BIT Numer. Math. 18, 475-489 (1978) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Song, MH, Yang, ZW, Liu, MZ: Stability of θ-methods for advanced differential equations with piecewise continuous arguments. Comput. Math. Appl. 49, 1295-1301 (2005) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Liu, MZ, Song, MH, Yang, ZW: Stability of Runge. Kutta methods in the numerical solution of equation \(u'(t) = au(t) + a_{0} u([t])\). J. Comput. Appl. Math. 166, 361-370 (2004) View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar