2
$\begingroup$

I am trying to figure out how to implement a solver for a system of nonlinear equations of the form

\begin{align*} u_1 &= y_n + h\left(a_{1,1}f(t_n + c_1 h, u_1) + a_{1,2}f(t_n + c_2 h, u_2)\right) \\ u_2 &= y_n + h\left(a_{2,1}f(t_n + c_1 h, u_1) + a_{2,2}f(t_n + c_2 h, u_2)\right) \end{align*} where $f: \mathbb{R}^m\to\mathbb{R}^m$ can be any nonlinear function, and $u_1, u_2 \in \mathbb{R}^m$ are the only unknowns.

I know how to use Newton's method $\vec{x}_{k+1} = \vec{x}_{k} - J^{-1}(F)F(\vec{x}_{k})$ for a single vector function, but I am confused on how to adapt this for multiple. From the papers I have been reading, authors reference using a modified Newton method for block matrices created with the kronecker product, but when I do that it leaves me with a matrix in $\mathbb{R}^{2m}$ that I don't know what to do with. I have also seen authors define a Jacobian matrix that contains other Jacobians, but again, I don't know how to handle that on a computer. How should I go about creating an iterative method for a system like this? I am trying to implement this to use it with the Radau IIA methods.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ For the Newton method you'll need write your equations as $\vec{F}(\vec{x})=0$ where $\vec{x}$ is the vector of unknowns. Then this will be the familiar situation of a single vector function. $\endgroup$ – Maxim Umansky Sep 5 at 16:35
  • $\begingroup$ @MaximUmansky I'm aware of that, but I am still confused on how to properly set up a system in $\mathbb{R}^{2m}$ $\endgroup$ – vlovero Sep 5 at 16:43
5
$\begingroup$

If you have a single vector equation $\vec{F}(\vec{x})=0$ then you solve it by representing that state vector $\vec{x}$ as a set of amplitudes $[x_0,x_1,...,x_{n-1}]$ after discretization by your favorite method (FD, FV, FEM, spectral); and we know how to solve it. If you also have a second equation $\vec{G}(\vec{y})=0$ then the full state vector is $[x_0,x_1,...,x_{n-1}, y_0,y_1, ..., y_{n-1}]$, otherwise the same thing.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I was way over complicating how to solve for the vectors. I didn't realize horizontally stacking the vectors takes care of the job. Thanks a ton $\endgroup$ – vlovero Sep 5 at 19:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.