|
| 1 | +# Runge-Kutta-Chebyshev Integrator |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +This is an implementation of the Runge-Kutta-Chebyshev (RKC) |
| 4 | +integrator. This is a port of the `rkc.f` routine from Sommeijer et |
| 5 | +al. 1997, as downloaded from Netlib. |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | +Here's the original comments: |
| 8 | + |
| 9 | +``` |
| 10 | +ABSTRACT: RKC integrates initial value problems for systems of first |
| 11 | +order ordinary differential equations. It is based on a family of |
| 12 | +explicit Runge-Kutta-Chebyshev formulas of order two. The stability |
| 13 | +of members of the family increases quadratically in the number of |
| 14 | +stages m. An estimate of the spectral radius is used at each step to |
| 15 | +select the smallest m resulting in a stable integration. RKC is |
| 16 | +appropriate for the solution to modest accuracy of mildly stiff |
| 17 | +problems with eigenvalues of Jacobians that are close to the negative |
| 18 | +real axis. For such problems it has the advantages of explicit |
| 19 | +one-step methods and very low storage. If it should turn out that RKC |
| 20 | +is using m far beyond 100, the problem is not mildly stiff and |
| 21 | +alternative methods should be considered. Answers can be obtained |
| 22 | +cheaply anywhere in the interval of integration by means of a |
| 23 | +continuous extension evaluated in the subroutine RKCINT. |
| 24 | +
|
| 25 | +The initial value problems arising from semi-discretization of |
| 26 | +diffusion-dominated parabolic partial differential equations and of |
| 27 | +reaction-diffusion equations, especially in two and three spatial |
| 28 | +variables, exemplify the problems for which RKC was designed. Two |
| 29 | +example programs, ExA and ExB, are provided that show how to use RKC. |
| 30 | +
|
| 31 | +USAGE: RKC integrates a system of NEQN first order ordinary |
| 32 | +differential equations specified by a subroutine F from T to TEND. |
| 33 | +The initial values at T are input in Y(*). On all returns from RKC, |
| 34 | +Y(*) is an approximate solution at T. In the computation of Y(*), the |
| 35 | +local error has been controlled at each step to satisfy a relative |
| 36 | +error tolerance RTOL and absolute error tolerances ATOL(*). The array |
| 37 | +INFO(*) specifies the way the problem is to be solved. WORK(*) is a |
| 38 | +work array. IDID reports success or the reason the computation has |
| 39 | +been terminated. |
| 40 | +
|
| 41 | +FIRST CALL TO RK |
| 42 | +
|
| 43 | +You must provide storage in your calling program for the arrays in the |
| 44 | +call list -- Y(NEQN), INFO(4), WORK(8+5*NEQN). If INFO(2) = 0, you |
| 45 | +can reduce the storage for the work array to WORK(8+4*NEQN). ATOL may |
| 46 | +be a scalar or an array. If it is an array, you must provide storage |
| 47 | +for ATOL(NEQN). You must declare F in an external statement, supply |
| 48 | +the subroutine F and the function SPCRAD, and initialize the following |
| 49 | +quantities: |
| 50 | +
|
| 51 | + NEQN: The number of differential equations. Integer. |
| 52 | +
|
| 53 | + T: The initial point of the integration. Double precision. |
| 54 | + Must be a variable. |
| 55 | +
|
| 56 | + TEND: The end of the interval of integration. Double precision. |
| 57 | + TEND may be less than T. |
| 58 | +
|
| 59 | + Y(*): The initial value of the solution. Double precision array |
| 60 | + of length NEQN. |
| 61 | +
|
| 62 | + F: The name of a subroutine for evaluating the differential |
| 63 | + equation. It must have the form |
| 64 | +
|
| 65 | + subroutine f(neqn,t,y,dy) |
| 66 | + integer neqn |
| 67 | + double precision t,y(neqn),dy(neqn) |
| 68 | + dy(1) = ... |
| 69 | + ... |
| 70 | + dy(neqn) = ... |
| 71 | + return |
| 72 | + end |
| 73 | +
|
| 74 | +RTOL, |
| 75 | +ATOL(*): At each step of the integration the local error is controlled |
| 76 | + so that its RMS norm is no larger than tolerances RTOL, ATOL(*). |
| 77 | + RTOL is a double precision scalar. ATOL(*) is either a double |
| 78 | + precision scalar or a double precision array of length NEQN. |
| 79 | + RKC is designed for the solution of problems to modest accuracy. |
| 80 | + Because it is based on a method of order 2, it is relatively |
| 81 | + expensive to achieve high accuracy. |
| 82 | +
|
| 83 | + RTOL is a relative error tolerance. You must ask for some |
| 84 | + relative accuracy, but you cannot ask for too much for the |
| 85 | + precision available. Accordingly, it is required that |
| 86 | + 0.1 >= RTOL >= 10*uround. (See below for the machine and |
| 87 | + precision dependent quantity uround.) |
| 88 | +
|
| 89 | + ATOL is an absolute error tolerance that can be either a |
| 90 | + scalar or an array. When it is an array, the tolerances are |
| 91 | + applied to corresponding components of the solution and when |
| 92 | + it is a scalar, it is applied to all components. A scalar |
| 93 | + tolerance is reasonable only when all solution components are |
| 94 | + scaled to be of comparable size. A scalar tolerance saves a |
| 95 | + useful amount of storage and is convenient. Use INFO(*) to |
| 96 | + tell RKC whether ATOL is a scalar or an array. |
| 97 | +
|
| 98 | + The absolute error tolerances ATOL(*) must satisfy ATOL(i) >= 0 |
| 99 | + for i = 1,...,NEQN. ATOL(j)= 0 specifies a pure relative error |
| 100 | + test on component j of the solution, so it is an error if this |
| 101 | + component vanishes in the course of the integration. |
| 102 | +
|
| 103 | + If all is going well, reducing the tolerances by a factor of |
| 104 | + 0.1 will reduce the error in the computed solution by a factor |
| 105 | + of roughly 0.2. |
| 106 | +
|
| 107 | +INFO(*) Integer array of length 4 that specifies how the problem |
| 108 | + is to be solved. |
| 109 | +
|
| 110 | +INFO(1): RKC integrates the initial value problem from T to TEND. |
| 111 | + This is done by computing approximate solutions at points |
| 112 | + chosen automatically throughout [T, TEND]. Ordinarily RKC |
| 113 | + returns at each step with an approximate solution. These |
| 114 | + approximations show how y behaves throughout the interval. |
| 115 | + The subroutine RKCINT can be used to obtain answers anywhere |
| 116 | + in the span of a step very inexpensively. This makes it |
| 117 | + possible to obtain answers at specific points in [T, TEND] |
| 118 | + and to obtain many answers very cheaply when attempting to |
| 119 | + locating where some function of the solution has a zero |
| 120 | + (event location). Sometimes you will be interested only in |
| 121 | + a solution at TEND, so you can suppress the returns at each |
| 122 | + step along the way if you wish. |
| 123 | +
|
| 124 | +INFO(1) = 0 Return after each step on the way to TEND with a |
| 125 | + solution Y(*) at the output value of T. |
| 126 | +
|
| 127 | + = 1 Compute a solution Y(*) at TEND only. |
| 128 | +
|
| 129 | +INFO(2): RKC needs an estimate of the spectral radius of the Jacobian. |
| 130 | + You must provide a function that must be called SPCRAD and |
| 131 | + have the form |
| 132 | +
|
| 133 | + double precision function spcrad(neqn,t,y) |
| 134 | + integer neqn |
| 135 | + double precision t,y(neqn) |
| 136 | +
|
| 137 | + spcrad = < expression depending on info(2) > |
| 138 | +
|
| 139 | + return |
| 140 | + end |
| 141 | +
|
| 142 | + You can provide a dummy function and let RKC compute the |
| 143 | + estimate. Sometimes it is convenient for you to compute in |
| 144 | + SPCRAD a reasonably close upper bound on the spectral radius, |
| 145 | + using, e.g., Gershgorin's theorem. This may be faster and/or |
| 146 | + more reliable than having RKC compute one. |
| 147 | +
|
| 148 | +INFO(2) = 0 RKC is to compute the estimate internally. |
| 149 | + Assign any value to SPCRAD. |
| 150 | +
|
| 151 | + = 1 SPCRAD returns an upper bound on the spectral |
| 152 | + radius of the Jacobian of f at (t,y). |
| 153 | +
|
| 154 | +INFO(3): If you know that the Jacobian is constant, you should say so. |
| 155 | +
|
| 156 | +INFO(3) = 0 The Jacobian may not be constant. |
| 157 | +
|
| 158 | + = 1 The Jacobian is constant. |
| 159 | +
|
| 160 | +INFO(4): You must tell RKC whether ATOL is a scalar or an array. |
| 161 | +
|
| 162 | +INFO(4) = 0 ATOL is a double precision scalar. |
| 163 | +
|
| 164 | + = 1 ATOL is a double precision array of length NEQN. |
| 165 | +
|
| 166 | +WORK(*): Work array. Double precision array of length at least |
| 167 | + 8 + 5*NEQN if INFO(2) = 0 and otherwise, 8 + 4*NEQN. |
| 168 | +
|
| 169 | +IDID: Set IDID = 0 to initialize the integration. |
| 170 | +
|
| 171 | +
|
| 172 | +
|
| 173 | +RETURNS FROM RKC |
| 174 | +
|
| 175 | +T: The integration has advanced to T. |
| 176 | +
|
| 177 | +Y(*): The solution at T. |
| 178 | +
|
| 179 | +IDID: The value of IDID reports what happened. |
| 180 | +
|
| 181 | + SUCCESS |
| 182 | +
|
| 183 | + IDID = 1 T = TEND, so the integration is complete. |
| 184 | +
|
| 185 | + = 2 Took a step to the output value of T. To continue on |
| 186 | + towards TEND, just call RKC again. WARNING: Do not |
| 187 | + alter any argument between calls. |
| 188 | +
|
| 189 | + The last step, HLAST, is returned as WORK(1). RKCINT |
| 190 | + can be used to approximate the solution anywhere in |
| 191 | + [T-HLAST, T] very inexpensively using data in WORK(*). |
| 192 | +
|
| 193 | + The work can be monitored by inspecting data in RKCDID. |
| 194 | +
|
| 195 | + FAILURE |
| 196 | +
|
| 197 | + = 3 Improper error control: For some j, ATOL(j) = 0 |
| 198 | + and Y(j) = 0. |
| 199 | +
|
| 200 | + = 4 Unable to achieve the desired accuracy with the |
| 201 | + precision available. A severe lack of smoothness in |
| 202 | + the solution y(t) or the function f(t,y) is likely. |
| 203 | +
|
| 204 | + = 5 Invalid input parameters: NEQN <= 0, RTOL > 0.1, |
| 205 | + RTOL < 10*UROUND, or ATOL(i) < 0 for some i. |
| 206 | +
|
| 207 | + = 6 The method used by RKC to estimate the spectral |
| 208 | + radius of the Jacobian failed to converge. |
| 209 | +
|
| 210 | +RKCDID is a labelled common block that communicates statistics |
| 211 | + about the integration process: |
| 212 | + common /rkcdid/ nfe,nsteps,naccpt,nrejct,nfesig,maxm |
| 213 | +
|
| 214 | + The integer counters are: |
| 215 | +
|
| 216 | + NFE number of evaluations of F used |
| 217 | + to integrate the initial value problem |
| 218 | + NSTEPS number of integration steps |
| 219 | + NACCPT number of accepted steps |
| 220 | + NREJCT number of rejected steps |
| 221 | + NFESIG number of evaluations of F used |
| 222 | + to estimate the spectral radius |
| 223 | + MAXM maximum number of stages used |
| 224 | +
|
| 225 | + This data can be used to monitor the work and terminate a run |
| 226 | + that proves to be unacceptably expensive. Also, if MAXM should |
| 227 | + be far beyond 100, the problem is too expensive for RKC and |
| 228 | + alternative methods should be considered. |
| 229 | +
|
| 230 | + CAUTION: MACHINE/PRECISION ISSUES |
| 231 | +
|
| 232 | + UROUND (the machine precision) is the smallest number such that |
| 233 | + 1 + UROUND > 1, where 1 is a floating point number in the working |
| 234 | + precision. UROUND is set in a parameter statement in RKC. Its |
| 235 | + value depends on both the precision and the machine used, so it |
| 236 | + must be set appropriately. UROUND is the only constant in RKC |
| 237 | + that depends on the precision. |
| 238 | +
|
| 239 | + This version of RKC is written in double precision. It can be changed |
| 240 | + to single precision by replacing DOUBLE PRECISION in the declarations |
| 241 | + by REAL and changing the type of the floating point constants set in |
| 242 | + PARAMETER statements from double precision to real. |
| 243 | +
|
| 244 | +Authors: B.P. Sommeijer and J.G. Verwer |
| 245 | + Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science (CWI) |
| 246 | + Kruislaan 413 |
| 247 | + 1098 SJ Amsterdam |
| 248 | + The Netherlands |
| 249 | + |
| 250 | +
|
| 251 | + L.F. Shampine |
| 252 | + Mathematics Department |
| 253 | + Southern Methodist University |
| 254 | + Dallas, Texas 75275-0156 |
| 255 | + USA |
| 256 | + |
| 257 | +
|
| 258 | +Details of the methods used and the performance of RKC can be |
| 259 | +found in |
| 260 | +
|
| 261 | + B.P. Sommeijer, L.F. Shampine and J.G. Verwer |
| 262 | + RKC: an Explicit Solver for Parabolic PDEs. |
| 263 | + Technical Report MAS-R9715, CWI, Amsterdam, 1997 |
| 264 | +
|
| 265 | +This source code for RKC and some examples, as well as the |
| 266 | +reference solution to the second example can also be obtained |
| 267 | +by anonymous ftp from the address ftp://ftp.cwi.nl/pub/bsom/rkc |
| 268 | +``` |
0 commit comments