Skip to content

(WIP) Add IRK note #4

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions firk/Makefile
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
LL := latexmk
DEP := $(wildcard *.tex)
MAIN=main

main: ${DEP}
${LL} -f -pdf ${MAIN} -auxdir=output -outdir=output
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions firk/README.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
# Efficient Implicit Runge-Kutta Implementation

The PDF is at output/main.pdf.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

add the pdf

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I want to add the PDF after finishing and checking it, so that I am not going to introduce much binary to the repo.

141 changes: 141 additions & 0 deletions firk/main.tex
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,141 @@
% main.tex
\documentclass[a4paper,9pt]{article}
\usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,amsthm,amsbsy,amsfonts}
\usepackage{todonotes}
\usepackage{systeme}
\usepackage{physics}
\usepackage{cleveref}
\newcommand{\correspondsto}{\;\widehat{=}\;}
\usepackage{bm}
\usepackage{enumitem} % label enumerate
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}
\theoremstyle{definition}
\newtheorem{definition}{Definition}[section]
\theoremstyle{remark}
\newtheorem*{remark}{Remark}
% change Q.D.E symbol
\renewcommand\qedsymbol{$\hfill \mbox{\raggedright \rule{0.1in}{0.2in}}$}

\begin{document}

\author{Yingbo Ma\\
\tt{mayingbo5@gmail.com}}
\title{Efficient Implicit Runge-Kutta Implementation}
\date{April, 2020}

\maketitle

\section{Notation}
\todo{Is this necessary?}

\section{Runge-Kutta Methods}
Runge-Kutta methods can numerically solve differential-algebraic equations (DAEs)
that are written in the form of
\begin{equation}
M \dv{u}{t} = f(u, t),\quad u(a)=u_a \in \mathbb{R}^m, \quad t\in [a, b].
\end{equation}

\begin{definition} \label{def:rk}
An \emph{$s$-stage Runge Kutta} has the coefficients $a_{ij}, b_i,$ and $c_j$
for $i=1,2,\dots,s$ and $j=1,2,\dots,s$. One can also denote the coefficients
simply by $\bm{A}, \bm{b},$ and $\bm{c}$. A step of the method is
\begin{equation} \label{eq:rk_sum}
u_{n+1} = u_n + \sum_{i=1}^s b_i k_i,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align} \label{eq:rk_lin}
M z_i &= \sum_{j=1}^s a_{ij}k_j\qq{or} (I_s \otimes M) \bm{z} =
(\bm{A}\otimes I_m)\bm{k}, \quad g_i = u_n + z_i \\
k_i &= hf(g_i, t+c_ih).
\end{align}
\end{definition}

We observe that when $a_{ij} = 0$ for $i\ge j$, \cref{eq:rk_lin} can be computed
without solving a system of algebraic equations, and we call methods with this
property \emph{explicit} otherwise \emph{implicit}.

We should note solving $z_i$ is much preferred over $g_i$, as they have a
smaller magnitude. A method is stiffly accurate, i.e. the stability function
$R(\infty) = 0$, when the matrix $\bm{A}$ is fully ranked and $a_{si} = b_i$.
Hence, $\bm{b}^T\bm{A}^{-1}$ gives the last row of the identity matrix $I_s$. We
can use this condition to further simplify \cref{eq:rk_sum} (by slight abuse of
notation):
\begin{equation} \label{eq:rk_sim}
u_{n+1} = u_n + \bm{b}^T\bm{k} = u_n +
\bm{b}^T\underbrace{\bm{A}^{-1}\bm{z}}_\text{\cref{eq:rk_lin}} = u_n +
\mqty(0 & \cdots & 0 & 1)\bm{z} = u_n + z_s.
\end{equation}

\section{Solving Nonlinear Systems from Implicit Runge-Kutta Methods}
We have to solve \cref{eq:rk_lin} for $\bm{z}$ when a Runge-Kutta method is
implicit. More explicitly, we need to solve $G(\bm{z}) = \bm{0}$, where
\begin{equation} \label{eq:nonlinear_rk}
G(\bm{z}) = (I_s \otimes M) \bm{z} - h(\bm{A}\otimes I_m) \tilde{\bm{f}}(\bm{z}) \qq{and}
\tilde{f}(\bm{z})_i = f(u_n+z_i, t+c_i h)
\end{equation}
The propose of introducing a computationally expensive nonlinear
system solving step is to combat extreme stiffness. Hence, the Jacobian matrix
arising from \cref{eq:rk_lin} is ill-conditioned. We must use Newton
iteration to ensure stability, since fixed-point iteration only converges for
contracting maps, which greatly limits the step size.

Astute readers may notice that the Jacobian
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\bm{J}}_{ij} = \pdv{\tilde{\bm{f}}_i}{\bm{z}_j} = \pdv{f(u_n + z_i, t+c_ih)}{u}
\end{equation}
requires us to compute the Jacobian of $f$ at $s$ many different points, which
is very expensive. We can approximate it by
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\bm{J}}_{ij} \approx J = \pdv{f(u_n, t)}{u}.
\end{equation}
Our simplified Newton iteration from \cref{eq:nonlinear_rk} is then
\begin{align} \label{eq:newton_1}
(I_s \otimes M - h\bm{A}\otimes J) \Delta \bm{z}^k &= -G(\bm{z}^k) = -(I_s
\otimes M) \bm{z}^k + h(\bm{A}\otimes I_m) \tilde{\bm{f}}(\bm{z}^k) \\
\bm{z}^{k+1} &= \bm{z}^{k} + \Delta \bm{z}^k \label{eq:newton_2},
\end{align}
where $\bm{z}^k$ is the approximation to $\bm{z}$ at the $k$-th iteration.

In Hairer's Radau IIA implementation, he left multiplies \cref{eq:newton_1} by
$(hA)^{-1} \otimes I_m$ to exploit the structure of the iteration matrix
\cite{hairer1999stiff}, so we have
\begin{align}
((hA)^{-1} \otimes I_m)(I_s \otimes M) &= (hA)^{-1} \otimes M \\
((hA)^{-1} \otimes I_m)(h\bm{A}\otimes J) &= I_s\otimes J \\
((hA)^{-1} \otimes I_m)G(\bm{z}^k) &= ((hA)^{-1} \otimes M) \bm{z}^k -
\tilde{\bm{f}}(\bm{z}^k),
\end{align}
and finally,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:newton1}
((hA)^{-1} \otimes M - I_s\otimes J) \Delta \bm{z}^k = -((hA)^{-1} \otimes M)
\bm{z}^k + \tilde{\bm{f}}(\bm{z}^k).
\end{equation}
Hairer also diagonalizes $A^{-1}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
V^{-1}A^{-1}V = \Lambda,
\end{equation}
to decouple the $sm \times sm$ system. To transforming \cref{eq:newton1} to
the eigenbasis of $A^{-1}$, notice
\begin{equation}
A^{-1}x = b \implies V^{-1}A^{-1}x = V^{-1}b \implies \Lambda V^{-1}x =
V^{-1}b.
\end{equation}
Similarly, we have
\begin{align}
&(h^{-1} \Lambda \otimes M - I_s\otimes J) (V^{-1}\otimes I_m)\Delta\bm{z}^k\\
=& (V^{-1}\otimes I_m)(-((hA)^{-1} \otimes M)
\bm{z}^k + \tilde{\bm{f}}(\bm{z}^k)).
\end{align}
We can introduce the transformed variable $\bm{w} = (V^{-1}\otimes I_m) \bm{z}$
to further reduce computation, so \cref{eq:newton1} and \cref{eq:newton2} is now
\begin{align} \label{eq:newton2}
(h^{-1} \Lambda \otimes M - I_s\otimes J) \Delta\bm{w}^k
&= -(h^{-1} \Lambda \otimes M) \bm{w}^k +
(V^{-1}\otimes I_m)\tilde{\bm{f}}((V\otimes I_m)\bm{w}^k) \\
\bm{w}^{k+1} &= \bm{w}^{k} + \Delta \bm{w}^k.
\end{align}

\bibliography{reference.bib}
\bibliographystyle{siam}

\end{document}
10 changes: 10 additions & 0 deletions firk/reference.bib
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
@article{hairer1999stiff,
title={Stiff differential equations solved by Radau methods},
author={Hairer, Ernst and Wanner, Gerhard},
journal={Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics},
volume={111},
number={1-2},
pages={93--111},
year={1999},
publisher={Elsevier}
}