Available in electronic format
Available in print format
Mathematics of Computation
Journal of the American Mathematical Society
ISSN 1088-6842(e) ISSN 0025-5718(p)
     

An extension and analysis of the Shu-Osher representation of Runge-Kutta methods

Author(s): L. Ferracina; M. N. Spijker.
Journal: Math. Comp. 74 (2005), 201-219.
MSC (2000): Primary 65M20; Secondary 65L05, 65L06
Posted: June 11, 2004
Retrieve article in: PDF

Abstract | References | Similar articles | Additional information

Abstract: In the context of solving nonlinear partial differential equations, Shu and Osher introduced representations of explicit Runge-Kutta methods, which lead to stepsize conditions under which the numerical process is total-variation-diminishing (TVD). Much attention has been paid to these representations in the literature.

In general, a Shu-Osher representation of a given Runge-Kutta method is not unique. Therefore, of special importance are representations of a given method which are best possible with regard to the stepsize condition that can be derived from them.

Several basic questions are still open, notably regarding the following issues: (1) the formulation of a simple and general strategy for finding a best possible Shu-Osher representation for any given Runge-Kutta method; (2) the question of whether the TVD property of a given Runge-Kutta method can still be guaranteed when the stepsize condition, corresponding to a best possible Shu-Osher representation of the method, is violated; (3) the generalization of the Shu-Osher approach to general (possibly implicit) Runge-Kutta methods.

In this paper we give an extension and analysis of the original Shu-Osher representation, by means of which the above questions can be settled. Moreover, we clarify analogous questions regarding properties which are referred to, in the literature, by the terms monotonicity and strong-stability-preserving (SSP).


References:

1.
K. BURRAGE (1982): Efficiently implementable algebraically stable Runge-Kutta methods, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 19, 245-258. MR 83d:65235

2.
J.C. BUTCHER (1987): The numerical analysis of ordinary differential equations, John Wiley (Chichester). MR 88d:65002

3.
K. DEKKER AND J.G. VERWER (1984): Stability of Runge-Kutta methods for stiff nonlinear differential equations, North-Holland Publ. Comp. (Amsterdam). MR 86g:65003

4.
L. FERRACINA AND M.N. SPIJKER (2002): Stepsize restrictions for the total-variation-diminishing property in general Runge-Kutta methods, Report MI 2002-21 (2002), Mathematical Institute, University of Leiden. To appear in SIAM J. Numer. Anal.

5.
A. GERISH AND R. WEINER (2003): On the positivity of low order explicit Runge-Kutta schemes applied in splitting methods, Computers and Mathematics with Applications 45, 53-67.

6.
S. GOTTLIEB AND C.-W. SHU (1998): Total-variation-diminishing Runge-Kutta schemes, Math. Comp. 67, 73-85. MR 98c:65122

7.
S. GOTTLIEB, C.-W. SHU, AND E. TADMOR (2001): Strong-stability-preserving high-order time discretization methods, SIAM Review 43, 89-112. MR 2002f:65132

8.
E. HAIRER, S.P. NøRSETT, AND G. WANNER (1987): Solving ordinary differential equations I, Springer Verlag (Berlin). MR 87m:65005

9.
E. HAIRER AND G. WANNER (1996): Solving ordinary differential equations II. Stiff and differential-algebraic problems, Second Revised Edition, Springer (Berlin).MR 97m:65007

10.
A. HARTEN (1983): High resolution schemes for hyperbolic conservation laws, J. Comput. Phys. 49, 357-393. MR 84g:65115

11.
I. HIGUERAS (2002): On strong stability preserving time discretization methods, Report n.2 (2002), Departamento de Matemática e Informática, Universidad Pública de Navarra.

12.
W. HUNDSDORFER, S.J. RUUTH, AND R.J. SPITERI (2003): Monotonicity-preserving linear multistep methods, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 41, 605-623.

13.
W. HUNDSDORFER AND J.G. VERWER (2003): Numerical solution of time-dependent advection-diffusion-reaction equations, Springer Ser. Comput. Math. 33, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

14.
J.F.B.M. KRAAIJEVANGER (1991): Contractivity of Runge-Kutta methods, BIT 31, 482-528. MR 92i:65120

15.
D. KRÖNER (1997): Numerical schemes for conservation laws, Wiley, Teubner (Chichester, Stuttgart). MR 98b:65003

16.
C.B. LANEY (1998): Computational gas dynamics, Cambridge University Press (Cambridge). MR 2000e:76086

17.
R.J. LEVEQUE (2002): Finite volume methods for hyperbolic problems, Cambridge University Press (Cambridge). MR 2003h:65001

18.
K.W. MORTON (1980): Stability of difference approximations to a diffusion-convection equation, Int. J. Num. Meth. Eng. 15, 677-683. MR 82i:76080

19.
S.J. RUUTH AND R.J. SPITERI (2002): Two barriers on strong-stability-preserving time discretization methods, J. Sci. Comput. 17, 211-220.

20.
C.-W. SHU (1988): Total-variation-diminishing time discretizations, SIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comput. 9, 1073-1084. MR 90a:65196

21.
C.-W. SHU (2002): A survey of strong stability preserving high-order time discretizations, Collected Lectures on the Preservation of Stability under Discretization, D. Estep, S. Tavener Editors, SIAM (Philadelphia, PA), 51-65.

22.
C.-W. SHU AND S. OSHER (1988): Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes, J. Comput. Phys. 77, 439-471. MR 89g:65113

23.
M.N. SPIJKER (1983): Contractivity in the numerical solution of initial value problems, Numer. Math. 42, 271-290. MR 85b:65067

24.
R.J. SPITERI AND S.J. RUUTH (2002): A new class of optimal high-order strong-stability-preserving time discretization methods, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 40, 469-491. MR 2003g:65083

25.
E.F. TORO (1999): Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics, Second Edition, Springer-Verlag (Berlin). MR 2000f:76091


Similar Articles:

Retrieve articles in Mathematics of Computation with MSC (2000): 65M20, 65L05, 65L06

Retrieve articles in all Journals with MSC (2000): 65M20, 65L05, 65L06


Additional Information:

L. Ferracina
Affiliation: Mathematical Institute, Leiden University, Niels Bohrweg 1, 2333 CA Leiden, The Netherlands
Email: ferra@math.leidenuniv.nl

M. N. Spijker
Affiliation: Mathematical Institute, Leiden University, Niels Bohrweg 1, 2333 CA Leiden, The Netherlands
Email: spijker@math.leidenuniv.nl

DOI: 10.1090/S0025-5718-04-01664-3
PII: S 0025-5718(04)01664-3
Keywords: Initial value problem, conservation law, method of lines (MOL), Runge-Kutta formula, Shu-Osher representation, total-variation-diminishing (TVD), strong-stability-preserving (SSP), monotonicity.
Received by editor(s): May 7, 2003 and, in revised form, August 3, 2003
Posted: June 11, 2004
Copyright of article: Copyright 2004, American Mathematical Society


  AMS Website Logo Small Comments: webmaster@ams.org
© Copyright 2009, American Mathematical Society
Privacy Statement
Search the AMSPowered by Google