# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

August  2012, 32(8): 2759-2803. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2012.32.2759

## Stability and stabilization of the constrained runs schemes for equation-free projection to a slow manifold

 1 Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Twente, Enschede, 7500 AE, Netherlands 2 Department of Computer Science, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Heverlee, B-3001, Belgium 3 Department of Chemical and Biological Egineering, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, United States 4 Department of Mathematics and Statistics and Center for Biodynamics, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215 5 Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, and Program in Applied and Computational Mathematics, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, United States

Received  August 2011 Revised  November 2011 Published  March 2012

In [C. W. Gear, T. J. Kaper, I. G. Kevrekidis and A. Zagaris, Projecting to a slow manifold: Singularly perturbed systems and legacy codes, SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst. 4 (2005), 711--732], we developed the family of constrained runs algorithms to find points on low-dimensional, attracting, slow manifolds in systems of nonlinear differential equations with multiple time scales. For user-specified values of a subset of the system variables parametrizing the slow manifold (which we term observables and denote collectively by $u$), these iterative algorithms return values of the remaining system variables $v$ so that the point $(u,v)$ approximates a point on a slow manifold. In particular, the $m-$th constrained runs algorithm ($m = 0, 1, \ldots$) approximates a point $(u,v_m)$ that is the appropriate zero of the $(m+1)-$st time derivative of $v$. % The accuracy with which $(u,v_m)$ approximates the corresponding point on the slow manifold with the same value of the observables has been established in [A. Zagaris, C. W. Gear, T. J. Kaper and I. G. Kevrekidis, Analysis of the accuracy and convergence of equation-free projection to a slow manifold, ESAIM: M2AN 43(4) (2009) 757--784] for systems for which the observables $u$ evolve exclusively on the slow time scale. There, we also determined explicit conditions under which the $m-$th constrained runs scheme converges to the fixed point $(u,v_m)$ and identified conditions under which it fails to converge. Here, we consider the questions of stability and stabilization of these iterative algorithms for the case in which the observables $u$ are also allowed to evolve on a fast time scale. The stability question in this case is more complicated, since it involves a generalized eigenvalue problem for a pair of matrices encoding geometric and dynamical characteristics of the system of differential equations. We determine the conditions under which these schemes converge or diverge in a series of cases in which this problem is explicitly solvable. We illustrate our main stability and stabilization results for the constrained runs schemes on certain planar systems with multiple time scales, and also on a more-realistic sixth order system with multiple time scales that models a network of coupled enzymatic reactions. Finally, we consider the issue of stabilization of the $m-$th constrained runs algorithm when the functional iteration scheme is divergent or converges slowly. In that case, we demonstrate on concrete examples how Newton's method and Broyden's method may replace functional iteration to yield stable iterative schemes.
Citation: Antonios Zagaris, Christophe Vandekerckhove, C. William Gear, Tasso J. Kaper, Ioannis G. Kevrekidis. Stability and stabilization of the constrained runs schemes for equation-free projection to a slow manifold. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2012, 32 (8) : 2759-2803. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2012.32.2759
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
 [1] José M. Arrieta, Esperanza Santamaría. Estimates on the distance of inertial manifolds. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2014, 34 (10) : 3921-3944. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2014.34.3921 [2] James C. Robinson. Computing inertial manifolds. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2002, 8 (4) : 815-833. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2002.8.815 [3] James C. Robinson. Inertial manifolds with and without delay. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 1999, 5 (4) : 813-824. doi: 10.3934/dcds.1999.5.813 [4] Ricardo Rosa. Approximate inertial manifolds of exponential order. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 1995, 1 (3) : 421-448. doi: 10.3934/dcds.1995.1.421 [5] A. Debussche, R. Temam. Some new generalizations of inertial manifolds. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 1996, 2 (4) : 543-558. doi: 10.3934/dcds.1996.2.543 [6] Christian Lax, Sebastian Walcher. Singular perturbations and scaling. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2020, 25 (1) : 1-29. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2019170 [7] A. V. Rezounenko. Inertial manifolds with delay for retarded semilinear parabolic equations. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2000, 6 (4) : 829-840. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2000.6.829 [8] Peter Brune, Björn Schmalfuss. Inertial manifolds for stochastic pde with dynamical boundary conditions. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2011, 10 (3) : 831-846. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2011.10.831 [9] Changbing Hu, Kaitai Li. A simple construction of inertial manifolds under time discretization. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 1997, 3 (4) : 531-540. doi: 10.3934/dcds.1997.3.531 [10] Vladimir V. Chepyzhov, Anna Kostianko, Sergey Zelik. Inertial manifolds for the hyperbolic relaxation of semilinear parabolic equations. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2019, 24 (3) : 1115-1142. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2019009 [11] Zvi Artstein. Invariance principle in the singular perturbations limit. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2019, 24 (8) : 3653-3666. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2018309 [12] Rolf Bronstering. Some computational aspects of approximate inertial manifolds and finite differences. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 1996, 2 (4) : 417-454. doi: 10.3934/dcds.1996.2.417 [13] Norbert Koksch, Stefan Siegmund. Feedback control via inertial manifolds for nonautonomous evolution equations. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2011, 10 (3) : 917-936. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2011.10.917 [14] L. Dieci, M. S Jolly, Ricardo Rosa, E. S. Van Vleck. Error in approximation of Lyapunov exponents on inertial manifolds: The Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2008, 9 (3&4, May) : 555-580. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2008.9.555 [15] Michel Chipot, Senoussi Guesmia. On the asymptotic behavior of elliptic, anisotropic singular perturbations problems. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2009, 8 (1) : 179-193. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2009.8.179 [16] Senoussi Guesmia, Abdelmouhcene Sengouga. Some singular perturbations results for semilinear hyperbolic problems. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2012, 5 (3) : 567-580. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2012.5.567 [17] Claudio Marchi. On the convergence of singular perturbations of Hamilton-Jacobi equations. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2010, 9 (5) : 1363-1377. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2010.9.1363 [18] Chiara Zanini. Singular perturbations of finite dimensional gradient flows. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2007, 18 (4) : 657-675. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2007.18.657 [19] Canela Jordi. Singular perturbations of Blaschke products and connectivity of Fatou components. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2017, 37 (7) : 3567-3585. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2017153 [20] Yuanzhen Shao. Continuous maximal regularity on singular manifolds and its applications. Evolution Equations & Control Theory, 2016, 5 (2) : 303-335. doi: 10.3934/eect.2016006

2018 Impact Factor: 1.143