semi lagrangian methods for monge amp ere equations
play

Semi-Lagrangian Methods for Monge-Amp` ere Equations Max Jensen - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Semi-Lagrangian Methods for Monge-Amp` ere Equations Max Jensen University of Sussex joint work with Xiaobing Feng (University of Tennessee) http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.04758 Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 1 Part 1 Monge-Amp` ere


  1. Semi-Lagrangian Methods for Monge-Amp` ere Equations Max Jensen University of Sussex joint work with Xiaobing Feng (University of Tennessee) http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.04758 Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 1

  2. Part 1 Monge-Amp` ere as Bellman problem Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 2

  3. excarvation pile of soil One motivation: optimal transport ◮ Consider soil ◮ f + ( x ) = height of pile at x , x ◮ f − ( x ) = depth of hole at x , y � � f + = f − < ∞ . with ◮ We want to move the soil into holes: transport plan x �→ s ( x ). ◮ Then f + = f − ( s ) det( Ds ) ( D gradient) ◮ Cost of transport related quadratically to distance: ◮ optimal transport plan s ∗ has a potential u ∗ s ∗ = ∂ u ∗ ◮ For smooth u we have the Monge-Amp` ere equation f + = f − ( Du ) det( D 2 u ) ( D 2 Hessian) ◮ Other motivation: prescribed Gaussian curvature. Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 3

  4. excarvation pile of soil One motivation: optimal transport ◮ Consider soil ◮ f + ( x ) = height of pile at x , x ◮ f − ( x ) = depth of hole at x , y � � f + = f − < ∞ . with ◮ We want to move the soil into holes: transport plan x �→ s ( x ). ◮ Then f + = f − ( s ) det( Ds ) ( D gradient) ◮ Cost of transport related quadratically to distance: ◮ optimal transport plan s ∗ has a potential u ∗ s ∗ = ∂ u ∗ ◮ For smooth u we have the Monge-Amp` ere equation f + = f − ( Du ) det( D 2 u ) ( D 2 Hessian) ◮ Other motivation: prescribed Gaussian curvature. Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 3

  5. Simple Monge-Amp` ere equation ◮ The simple Monge-Amp` ere equation is one of the model problems for the development of numerical methods. ◮ It combines the following properties: ◮ fully nonlinear ◮ degenerate elliptic ◮ anisotropic The simple Monge-Amp` ere equation Let Ω ⊂ R n be strictly convex. Let u | ∂ Ω = g and, with f ( x ) ≥ 0, � f � n − det D 2 u = 0 . n Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 4

  6. Ellipticity and convexity Definition (elliptic) The operator F in a differential equation F ( x , u ( x ) , Du ( x ) , D 2 u ( x )) = 0 is called (degenerate) elliptic if, x ∈ Ω , r ∈ R , p ∈ R n , F ( x , r , p , X ) ≤ F ( x , r , p , Y ) whenever Y − X is pos. semidefinite where X , Y are symmetric matrices. ◮ Set � f ( x ) � n F ( x , r , p , X ) = − det X . n Then F satisfies the ellipticity condition only for positive semi-definite X , Y . ◮ So a theory based on ellipticity is restricted to convex functions. Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 5

  7. Ellipticity and convexity Definition (elliptic) The operator F in a differential equation F ( x , u ( x ) , Du ( x ) , D 2 u ( x )) = 0 is called (degenerate) elliptic if, x ∈ Ω , r ∈ R , p ∈ R n , F ( x , r , p , X ) ≤ F ( x , r , p , Y ) whenever Y − X is pos. semidefinite where X , Y are symmetric matrices. ◮ Set � f ( x ) � n F ( x , r , p , X ) = − det X . n Then F satisfies the ellipticity condition only for positive semi-definite X , Y . ◮ So a theory based on ellipticity is restricted to convex functions. Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 5

  8. Viscosity solution of the Monge-Amp` ere equation Definition ◮ Let u be convex and f ∈ C (Ω), f ≥ 0. ◮ u is viscosity subsolution (supersolution) of � n − det D 2 u = 0 � f n if for all convex ψ ∈ C 2 (Ω) and x 0 ∈ Ω such that u − ψ has a local maximum (minimum) at x 0 then � n − det D 2 ψ ≤ 0 � n − det D 2 ψ ≥ 0 � f �� f � . n n ◮ If u is viscosity sub- and supersolution it is a viscosity solution. ◮ If Ω ⊂ R n is open bounded and strictly convex and f ≥ 0 continuous, then there exists a unique viscosity solution of the simple Monge-Amp` ere equation. Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 6

  9. Problem ◮ Restrict the approximation space to convex functions? Problem ◮ Convex finite element functions not dense in set of convex functions. ◮ To obtain convergence one needs to admit non-convex functions into the approximation space. ◮ What about ◮ ellipticity, ◮ uniqueness? ◮ Other methods, such as finite I difference schemes, have the same nterpolant of ( x 1 + x 2 ) 2 density issue. (Aguilera, Morin; 2009) Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 7

  10. Introduction to Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman ◮ Generally (elliptic) Bellman equations of the type Hu = 0 where ( − A α : D 2 w + b α · ∇ w + c α w − r α ) . Hw := sup � �� � α ∈ A linear, 2nd order non-divergence form ◮ Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equations describe the optimal expected cost in a controlled stochastic process. ◮ Well-established field with own range of numerical tools. Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 8

  11. Classical equivalence ◮ We define the Hamiltonian √ � � n H : S → R , A �→ sup − B : A + det Bf , B ∈ S 1 where ◮ S is the set of self-adjoint linear mappings R n → R n , ◮ S 1 := { A ∈ S : trace A = 1 and A ≥ 0 } . ◮ We define the Monge-Amp` ere mapping � f � n M : S → R , A �→ − det( A ) . n Krylov (1987) H A = 0 ⇔ M A = 0 and A ≥ 0 . Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 9

  12. Uniqueness — on the whole space! ◮ Contour lines for diagonal A ∈ R 2 × 2 and f = 1. 2 2 � 1 � 1 0 � 2 2 � 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 b b 2 0 1 1 � 1 � 1 2 � 2 2 � 1 � 2 � 2 � 2 � 1 0 1 2 � 2 � 1 0 1 2 a a �� a 0 �� �� a 0 �� M H 0 b 0 b ◮ From the numerical point now uniqueness does not need to be enforced by a constraint on the approximation space, because the HJB operator only vanishes in first quadrant. Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 10

  13. Viscosity solutions of HJB Viscosity Solution of HJB ◮ v is a subsolution of HJB if for all smooth ψ H ( D 2 ψ ( x )) ≤ 0 at every x 0 which maximises v − ψ with v ( x ) = ψ ( x ). ◮ Supersolution similar. Subsolution + supersolution =: solution. ◮ Definition similar to that for Monge-Amp` ere, but for HJB there is no convexity condition as ellipticity holds on the whole space. ◮ We complement the differential equation with Dirichlet conditions in the pointwise sense: u ( x ) = g ( x ) , x ∈ ∂ Ω . Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 11

  14. Equivalence in viscosity sense ◮ From the general theory we have existence of a viscosity solution of the Monge-Amp` ere problem. Theorem (Feng, J (2016)) ◮ Let Ω be strictly convex and f ≥ 0 . Then { u ∈ C (Ω) convex and solves Mu = 0 in viscosity sense } = { u ∈ C (Ω) solves Hu = 0 in viscosity sense } Observe, regarding the proof: ◮ Monge-Amp` ere has a smaller set of test functions (convexity). ◮ Monge-Amp` ere only allows non-negative forcing term, otherwise difference u − ψ could be moved into forcing term and classical equivalence can be used. Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 12

  15. Comparison principle ◮ A comparison principle gives uniqueness. Theorem (Feng, J (2016)) ◮ Let u be a subsolution and v be a supersolution of the Bellman problem. ◮ Then u ≤ v on Ω if u ≤ v on ∂ Ω . ◮ Notice that comparison is based on pointwise and not on viscosity boundary conditions. Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 13

  16. Summary of Part 1 ◮ Simple Monge-Amp` ere equation � f � n − det D 2 u = 0 n Conditional uniqueness: comparison principle/well-posedness only for convex functions. ◮ Numerical difficulties: e.g. set of convex FE functions not dense in set of convex functions. ◮ We propose to use for numerics an HJB formulation √ � � − B : D 2 u + n sup det Bf = 0 . B ∈ S 1 ◮ The HJB formulation has the same viscosity solution as the Monge-Amp` ere problem, but unconditional comparison principle and well-posedness. Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 14

  17. Part 2 Semi-Lagrangian discretisation Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 15

  18. Theorem (Barles-Souganidis (1991)) If a numerical method is ◮ monotone ◮ pointwise consistent on Ω in the viscosity sense ◮ stable in L ∞ and it is ensured that numerical solutions exist, then the numerical solutions converge in L ∞ loc to the viscosity solution of the (elliptic) PDE. Theorem (Wasow-Motzkin (1952); Kocan (1995)) ◮ Consider a second-order elliptic PDE with ‘irrational angle of anisotropy‘ (even constant coefficient, linear PDE). ◮ Consider essentially a finite difference grid. ◮ If a numerical scheme is ◮ monotone, ◮ pointwise consistent, then its stencil grows unboundedly as h → 0 . Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 16

  19. Theorem (Barles-Souganidis (1991)) If a numerical method is ◮ monotone ◮ pointwise consistent on Ω in the viscosity sense ◮ stable in L ∞ and it is ensured that numerical solutions exist, then the numerical solutions converge in L ∞ loc to the viscosity solution of the (elliptic) PDE. Theorem (Wasow-Motzkin (1952); Kocan (1995)) ◮ Consider a second-order elliptic PDE with ‘irrational angle of anisotropy‘ (even constant coefficient, linear PDE). ◮ Consider essentially a finite difference grid. ◮ If a numerical scheme is ◮ monotone, ◮ pointwise consistent, then its stencil grows unboundedly as h → 0 . Slides available at https://goo.gl/v42Zv8 16

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend