Solve differential equation via successive approximations (contraction mapping principle)
I'm working on a problem (self study) to solve the differential equation $$
frac{dx}{dt} = tx^2 + x^3
$$
using successive approximations within a neighborhood interval of $delta < 1/5$. I'm given that the initial condition is $x(0) = 1$.
Toward this end, I've defined the contraction map $$
Phi(f)(t) , triangleq , 1 + int_0^t left{
s (f(s))^2 + (f(s))^3
right} ds.
$$
Let $f_{i+1} = Phi(f_i)$ and $f_0(t) = 1$.
Two things puzzle me:
Repeatedly solving the integrals to determine $f_1, f_2, f_3, ldots$, etc. and finding a pattern seems tedious / difficult since the polynomials blow up in degree. Is there an easier route here?
How does the given neighborhood radius $delta < 1/5$ figure into the solution? Or is it simply the interval for which the resulting solution is valid?
real-analysis differential-equations contraction-operator
add a comment |
I'm working on a problem (self study) to solve the differential equation $$
frac{dx}{dt} = tx^2 + x^3
$$
using successive approximations within a neighborhood interval of $delta < 1/5$. I'm given that the initial condition is $x(0) = 1$.
Toward this end, I've defined the contraction map $$
Phi(f)(t) , triangleq , 1 + int_0^t left{
s (f(s))^2 + (f(s))^3
right} ds.
$$
Let $f_{i+1} = Phi(f_i)$ and $f_0(t) = 1$.
Two things puzzle me:
Repeatedly solving the integrals to determine $f_1, f_2, f_3, ldots$, etc. and finding a pattern seems tedious / difficult since the polynomials blow up in degree. Is there an easier route here?
How does the given neighborhood radius $delta < 1/5$ figure into the solution? Or is it simply the interval for which the resulting solution is valid?
real-analysis differential-equations contraction-operator
1
What makes you think that the IVP has a closed form solution? Mathematica gives an expression in the implicit form (too long for a comment), in terms of the derivatives of the Airy function.
– user539887
Nov 29 at 19:15
It was a problem in a text book so I thought it would have a closed form...
– ted
Nov 29 at 20:12
add a comment |
I'm working on a problem (self study) to solve the differential equation $$
frac{dx}{dt} = tx^2 + x^3
$$
using successive approximations within a neighborhood interval of $delta < 1/5$. I'm given that the initial condition is $x(0) = 1$.
Toward this end, I've defined the contraction map $$
Phi(f)(t) , triangleq , 1 + int_0^t left{
s (f(s))^2 + (f(s))^3
right} ds.
$$
Let $f_{i+1} = Phi(f_i)$ and $f_0(t) = 1$.
Two things puzzle me:
Repeatedly solving the integrals to determine $f_1, f_2, f_3, ldots$, etc. and finding a pattern seems tedious / difficult since the polynomials blow up in degree. Is there an easier route here?
How does the given neighborhood radius $delta < 1/5$ figure into the solution? Or is it simply the interval for which the resulting solution is valid?
real-analysis differential-equations contraction-operator
I'm working on a problem (self study) to solve the differential equation $$
frac{dx}{dt} = tx^2 + x^3
$$
using successive approximations within a neighborhood interval of $delta < 1/5$. I'm given that the initial condition is $x(0) = 1$.
Toward this end, I've defined the contraction map $$
Phi(f)(t) , triangleq , 1 + int_0^t left{
s (f(s))^2 + (f(s))^3
right} ds.
$$
Let $f_{i+1} = Phi(f_i)$ and $f_0(t) = 1$.
Two things puzzle me:
Repeatedly solving the integrals to determine $f_1, f_2, f_3, ldots$, etc. and finding a pattern seems tedious / difficult since the polynomials blow up in degree. Is there an easier route here?
How does the given neighborhood radius $delta < 1/5$ figure into the solution? Or is it simply the interval for which the resulting solution is valid?
real-analysis differential-equations contraction-operator
real-analysis differential-equations contraction-operator
asked Nov 29 at 7:12
ted
488312
488312
1
What makes you think that the IVP has a closed form solution? Mathematica gives an expression in the implicit form (too long for a comment), in terms of the derivatives of the Airy function.
– user539887
Nov 29 at 19:15
It was a problem in a text book so I thought it would have a closed form...
– ted
Nov 29 at 20:12
add a comment |
1
What makes you think that the IVP has a closed form solution? Mathematica gives an expression in the implicit form (too long for a comment), in terms of the derivatives of the Airy function.
– user539887
Nov 29 at 19:15
It was a problem in a text book so I thought it would have a closed form...
– ted
Nov 29 at 20:12
1
1
What makes you think that the IVP has a closed form solution? Mathematica gives an expression in the implicit form (too long for a comment), in terms of the derivatives of the Airy function.
– user539887
Nov 29 at 19:15
What makes you think that the IVP has a closed form solution? Mathematica gives an expression in the implicit form (too long for a comment), in terms of the derivatives of the Airy function.
– user539887
Nov 29 at 19:15
It was a problem in a text book so I thought it would have a closed form...
– ted
Nov 29 at 20:12
It was a problem in a text book so I thought it would have a closed form...
– ted
Nov 29 at 20:12
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Contractractivity on a rectangular domain
To apply the fixed-point theorem one needs to fix a domain for the ODE and determine the Lipschitz constant there. In the most simple case the domain is rectangular, $[-δ,δ]times[1-M,1+M]$. The space for the Banach fixed-point theorem is then the set of continuous functions $X={cal C}([-δ,δ]to[1-M,1+M])$.
First one has to guarantee that $Φ$ maps $X$ into itself, that is, $|x(t)-1|<Mimplies |Φ(x)(t)-1|<M$ for $|t|<δ$. Then you can compute the Lipschitz constant $L$ over that rectangle and put as additional condition that the contraction constant for $Φ$ is contracting, that is, $Lδ<1$, possibly by making $δ$ smaller.
The first condition is satisfied if
$$
|Φ(x)(t)-1|leint_0^t |sx(s)^2+x(s)^3|ds<frac{δ^2}2(1+M)^2+δ(1+M)^3overset{!}{le} M.
$$
The last inequality can be transformed as
$$
left(1+fracδ{1+M}right)^2le 1+frac{2M}{(1+M)^4}
iff
δle (1+M)left(sqrt{1+frac{2M}{(1+M)^4}}-1right)
$$
The right side looks like

so that this approach allows to choose $δ=frac18$ with $M=0.5$.
The $x$-Lipschitz constant is the maximum over the $x$-derivative, thus $L=2δ(1+M)+3(1+M)^2=frac38+frac{27}4=7+frac18$ so that actually $Lδ<1$ and the iteration converges on this set.
To reach higher values of $t$ one needs to consider other regions than the rectangular one, or even other integral equations for the iteration, like $1-x(t)^{-1}=int_0^t(s+x(s)),ds$ which will then also need a separate computation of the contraction condition for the fixed-point theorem.
Upper and lower bounds
To get better bounds for the solution, use estimates on the differential equation itself so that the solution of differential inequalities provides the bounds.
For $t>0$ the solution is increasing, so that for $t< δle frac12$ we get $2tle x(t)$ which gives a lower and upper bound for the solution
$$
2tx^2le dot xle 2x^3implies t^2le 1-x(t)^{-1}land 1-x(t)^{-2}le 4t
\~~\
implies frac1{1-t^2}le x(t)le frac1{sqrt{1-4t}}
$$
which shows that the solution will diverge to infinity at some $t^*<1$, but not before $t=frac14<t^*$. Zooming into the numerical solution gives $t^*>0.446$ as close estimate.

For $t<0$ the inverted relations hold as $x(t)>0$ by the uniqueness theorem, as the zero function is also a solution. Thus for $t<0$ $$ frac1{1-t^2}ge x(t)ge frac1{sqrt{1-4t}}$$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3018311%2fsolve-differential-equation-via-successive-approximations-contraction-mapping-p%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Contractractivity on a rectangular domain
To apply the fixed-point theorem one needs to fix a domain for the ODE and determine the Lipschitz constant there. In the most simple case the domain is rectangular, $[-δ,δ]times[1-M,1+M]$. The space for the Banach fixed-point theorem is then the set of continuous functions $X={cal C}([-δ,δ]to[1-M,1+M])$.
First one has to guarantee that $Φ$ maps $X$ into itself, that is, $|x(t)-1|<Mimplies |Φ(x)(t)-1|<M$ for $|t|<δ$. Then you can compute the Lipschitz constant $L$ over that rectangle and put as additional condition that the contraction constant for $Φ$ is contracting, that is, $Lδ<1$, possibly by making $δ$ smaller.
The first condition is satisfied if
$$
|Φ(x)(t)-1|leint_0^t |sx(s)^2+x(s)^3|ds<frac{δ^2}2(1+M)^2+δ(1+M)^3overset{!}{le} M.
$$
The last inequality can be transformed as
$$
left(1+fracδ{1+M}right)^2le 1+frac{2M}{(1+M)^4}
iff
δle (1+M)left(sqrt{1+frac{2M}{(1+M)^4}}-1right)
$$
The right side looks like

so that this approach allows to choose $δ=frac18$ with $M=0.5$.
The $x$-Lipschitz constant is the maximum over the $x$-derivative, thus $L=2δ(1+M)+3(1+M)^2=frac38+frac{27}4=7+frac18$ so that actually $Lδ<1$ and the iteration converges on this set.
To reach higher values of $t$ one needs to consider other regions than the rectangular one, or even other integral equations for the iteration, like $1-x(t)^{-1}=int_0^t(s+x(s)),ds$ which will then also need a separate computation of the contraction condition for the fixed-point theorem.
Upper and lower bounds
To get better bounds for the solution, use estimates on the differential equation itself so that the solution of differential inequalities provides the bounds.
For $t>0$ the solution is increasing, so that for $t< δle frac12$ we get $2tle x(t)$ which gives a lower and upper bound for the solution
$$
2tx^2le dot xle 2x^3implies t^2le 1-x(t)^{-1}land 1-x(t)^{-2}le 4t
\~~\
implies frac1{1-t^2}le x(t)le frac1{sqrt{1-4t}}
$$
which shows that the solution will diverge to infinity at some $t^*<1$, but not before $t=frac14<t^*$. Zooming into the numerical solution gives $t^*>0.446$ as close estimate.

For $t<0$ the inverted relations hold as $x(t)>0$ by the uniqueness theorem, as the zero function is also a solution. Thus for $t<0$ $$ frac1{1-t^2}ge x(t)ge frac1{sqrt{1-4t}}$$
add a comment |
Contractractivity on a rectangular domain
To apply the fixed-point theorem one needs to fix a domain for the ODE and determine the Lipschitz constant there. In the most simple case the domain is rectangular, $[-δ,δ]times[1-M,1+M]$. The space for the Banach fixed-point theorem is then the set of continuous functions $X={cal C}([-δ,δ]to[1-M,1+M])$.
First one has to guarantee that $Φ$ maps $X$ into itself, that is, $|x(t)-1|<Mimplies |Φ(x)(t)-1|<M$ for $|t|<δ$. Then you can compute the Lipschitz constant $L$ over that rectangle and put as additional condition that the contraction constant for $Φ$ is contracting, that is, $Lδ<1$, possibly by making $δ$ smaller.
The first condition is satisfied if
$$
|Φ(x)(t)-1|leint_0^t |sx(s)^2+x(s)^3|ds<frac{δ^2}2(1+M)^2+δ(1+M)^3overset{!}{le} M.
$$
The last inequality can be transformed as
$$
left(1+fracδ{1+M}right)^2le 1+frac{2M}{(1+M)^4}
iff
δle (1+M)left(sqrt{1+frac{2M}{(1+M)^4}}-1right)
$$
The right side looks like

so that this approach allows to choose $δ=frac18$ with $M=0.5$.
The $x$-Lipschitz constant is the maximum over the $x$-derivative, thus $L=2δ(1+M)+3(1+M)^2=frac38+frac{27}4=7+frac18$ so that actually $Lδ<1$ and the iteration converges on this set.
To reach higher values of $t$ one needs to consider other regions than the rectangular one, or even other integral equations for the iteration, like $1-x(t)^{-1}=int_0^t(s+x(s)),ds$ which will then also need a separate computation of the contraction condition for the fixed-point theorem.
Upper and lower bounds
To get better bounds for the solution, use estimates on the differential equation itself so that the solution of differential inequalities provides the bounds.
For $t>0$ the solution is increasing, so that for $t< δle frac12$ we get $2tle x(t)$ which gives a lower and upper bound for the solution
$$
2tx^2le dot xle 2x^3implies t^2le 1-x(t)^{-1}land 1-x(t)^{-2}le 4t
\~~\
implies frac1{1-t^2}le x(t)le frac1{sqrt{1-4t}}
$$
which shows that the solution will diverge to infinity at some $t^*<1$, but not before $t=frac14<t^*$. Zooming into the numerical solution gives $t^*>0.446$ as close estimate.

For $t<0$ the inverted relations hold as $x(t)>0$ by the uniqueness theorem, as the zero function is also a solution. Thus for $t<0$ $$ frac1{1-t^2}ge x(t)ge frac1{sqrt{1-4t}}$$
add a comment |
Contractractivity on a rectangular domain
To apply the fixed-point theorem one needs to fix a domain for the ODE and determine the Lipschitz constant there. In the most simple case the domain is rectangular, $[-δ,δ]times[1-M,1+M]$. The space for the Banach fixed-point theorem is then the set of continuous functions $X={cal C}([-δ,δ]to[1-M,1+M])$.
First one has to guarantee that $Φ$ maps $X$ into itself, that is, $|x(t)-1|<Mimplies |Φ(x)(t)-1|<M$ for $|t|<δ$. Then you can compute the Lipschitz constant $L$ over that rectangle and put as additional condition that the contraction constant for $Φ$ is contracting, that is, $Lδ<1$, possibly by making $δ$ smaller.
The first condition is satisfied if
$$
|Φ(x)(t)-1|leint_0^t |sx(s)^2+x(s)^3|ds<frac{δ^2}2(1+M)^2+δ(1+M)^3overset{!}{le} M.
$$
The last inequality can be transformed as
$$
left(1+fracδ{1+M}right)^2le 1+frac{2M}{(1+M)^4}
iff
δle (1+M)left(sqrt{1+frac{2M}{(1+M)^4}}-1right)
$$
The right side looks like

so that this approach allows to choose $δ=frac18$ with $M=0.5$.
The $x$-Lipschitz constant is the maximum over the $x$-derivative, thus $L=2δ(1+M)+3(1+M)^2=frac38+frac{27}4=7+frac18$ so that actually $Lδ<1$ and the iteration converges on this set.
To reach higher values of $t$ one needs to consider other regions than the rectangular one, or even other integral equations for the iteration, like $1-x(t)^{-1}=int_0^t(s+x(s)),ds$ which will then also need a separate computation of the contraction condition for the fixed-point theorem.
Upper and lower bounds
To get better bounds for the solution, use estimates on the differential equation itself so that the solution of differential inequalities provides the bounds.
For $t>0$ the solution is increasing, so that for $t< δle frac12$ we get $2tle x(t)$ which gives a lower and upper bound for the solution
$$
2tx^2le dot xle 2x^3implies t^2le 1-x(t)^{-1}land 1-x(t)^{-2}le 4t
\~~\
implies frac1{1-t^2}le x(t)le frac1{sqrt{1-4t}}
$$
which shows that the solution will diverge to infinity at some $t^*<1$, but not before $t=frac14<t^*$. Zooming into the numerical solution gives $t^*>0.446$ as close estimate.

For $t<0$ the inverted relations hold as $x(t)>0$ by the uniqueness theorem, as the zero function is also a solution. Thus for $t<0$ $$ frac1{1-t^2}ge x(t)ge frac1{sqrt{1-4t}}$$
Contractractivity on a rectangular domain
To apply the fixed-point theorem one needs to fix a domain for the ODE and determine the Lipschitz constant there. In the most simple case the domain is rectangular, $[-δ,δ]times[1-M,1+M]$. The space for the Banach fixed-point theorem is then the set of continuous functions $X={cal C}([-δ,δ]to[1-M,1+M])$.
First one has to guarantee that $Φ$ maps $X$ into itself, that is, $|x(t)-1|<Mimplies |Φ(x)(t)-1|<M$ for $|t|<δ$. Then you can compute the Lipschitz constant $L$ over that rectangle and put as additional condition that the contraction constant for $Φ$ is contracting, that is, $Lδ<1$, possibly by making $δ$ smaller.
The first condition is satisfied if
$$
|Φ(x)(t)-1|leint_0^t |sx(s)^2+x(s)^3|ds<frac{δ^2}2(1+M)^2+δ(1+M)^3overset{!}{le} M.
$$
The last inequality can be transformed as
$$
left(1+fracδ{1+M}right)^2le 1+frac{2M}{(1+M)^4}
iff
δle (1+M)left(sqrt{1+frac{2M}{(1+M)^4}}-1right)
$$
The right side looks like

so that this approach allows to choose $δ=frac18$ with $M=0.5$.
The $x$-Lipschitz constant is the maximum over the $x$-derivative, thus $L=2δ(1+M)+3(1+M)^2=frac38+frac{27}4=7+frac18$ so that actually $Lδ<1$ and the iteration converges on this set.
To reach higher values of $t$ one needs to consider other regions than the rectangular one, or even other integral equations for the iteration, like $1-x(t)^{-1}=int_0^t(s+x(s)),ds$ which will then also need a separate computation of the contraction condition for the fixed-point theorem.
Upper and lower bounds
To get better bounds for the solution, use estimates on the differential equation itself so that the solution of differential inequalities provides the bounds.
For $t>0$ the solution is increasing, so that for $t< δle frac12$ we get $2tle x(t)$ which gives a lower and upper bound for the solution
$$
2tx^2le dot xle 2x^3implies t^2le 1-x(t)^{-1}land 1-x(t)^{-2}le 4t
\~~\
implies frac1{1-t^2}le x(t)le frac1{sqrt{1-4t}}
$$
which shows that the solution will diverge to infinity at some $t^*<1$, but not before $t=frac14<t^*$. Zooming into the numerical solution gives $t^*>0.446$ as close estimate.

For $t<0$ the inverted relations hold as $x(t)>0$ by the uniqueness theorem, as the zero function is also a solution. Thus for $t<0$ $$ frac1{1-t^2}ge x(t)ge frac1{sqrt{1-4t}}$$
answered Nov 30 at 23:40
LutzL
55.7k42054
55.7k42054
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3018311%2fsolve-differential-equation-via-successive-approximations-contraction-mapping-p%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
What makes you think that the IVP has a closed form solution? Mathematica gives an expression in the implicit form (too long for a comment), in terms of the derivatives of the Airy function.
– user539887
Nov 29 at 19:15
It was a problem in a text book so I thought it would have a closed form...
– ted
Nov 29 at 20:12