| Literature DB >> 33286595 |
Mutaz Mohammad1, Alexander Trounev2, Carlo Cattani3.
Abstract
This paper is devoted to shedding some light on the advantages of using tight frame systems for solving some types of fractional Volterra integral equations (FVIEs) involved by the Caputo fractional order derivative. A tight frame or simply framelet, is a generalization of an orthonormal basis. A lot of applications are modeled by non-negative functions; taking this into account in this paper, we consider framelet systems generated using some refinable non-negative functions, namely, B-splines. The FVIEs we considered were reduced to a set of linear system of equations and were solved numerically based on a collocation discretization technique. We present many important examples of FVIEs for which accurate and efficient numerical solutions have been accomplished and the numerical results converge very rapidly to the exact ones.Entities:
Keywords: fractional calculus; framelets; generalization of Unequal Error Protection (UEP); harmonic numerical analysis; numerical solution; volterra integral equations; wavelets
Year: 2020 PMID: 33286595 PMCID: PMC7517408 DOI: 10.3390/e22080824
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Entropy (Basel) ISSN: 1099-4300 Impact factor: 2.524
Numerical results of Example 3 using the framelet systems and for .
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | 0.01 | 7.26467 × | 1.85352 × |
| 0.2 | 0.04 | 9.10220 × | 6.91144 × |
| 0.3 | 0.09 | 1.82277 × | 1.51510 × |
| 0.4 | 0.16 | 3.51120 × | 2.67941 × |
| 0.5 | 0.25 | 4.47280 × | 4.28731 × |
| 0.6 | 0.36 | 8.36896 × | 7.18203 × |
| 0.7 | 0.49 | 1.17160 × | 1.06917 × |
| 0.8 | 0.64 | 1.64979 × | 1.51795 × |
| 0.9 | 0.81 | 2.29604 × | 2.08445 × |
| 1.0 | 1.00 | 2.99714 × | 2.72612 × |
Numerical results of Example 3 using the framelet systems and for .
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | 0.01 | 3.64554 × | 1.73553 × |
| 0.2 | 0.04 | 5.91254 × | 2.96533 × |
| 0.3 | 0.09 | 4.66455 × | 1.09373 × |
| 0.4 | 0.16 | 2.51037 × | 2.35522 × |
| 0.5 | 0.25 | 2.46092 × | 4.22966 × |
| 0.6 | 0.36 | 4.63545 × | 7.11944 × |
| 0.7 | 0.49 | 1.30932 × | 1.55358 × |
| 0.8 | 0.64 | 2.35355 × | 1.24774 × |
| 0.9 | 0.81 | 1.38865 × | 1.04342 × |
| 1.0 | 1.00 | 3.53446 × | 3.39882 × |
Numerical results of Example 4 using the framelet systems and for .
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | 0.01 | 7.88293 × | 2.92921 × |
| 0.2 | 0.04 | 7.67236 × | 1.36504 × |
| 0.3 | 0.09 | 2.36706 × | 1.05287 × |
| 0.4 | 0.16 | 1.09108 × | 2.91769 × |
| 0.5 | 0.25 | 1.27581 × | 4.42031 × |
| 0.6 | 0.36 | 1.69445 × | 5.90872 × |
| 0.7 | 0.49 | 2.44359 × | 1.06485 × |
| 0.8 | 0.64 | 3.32952 × | 1.27942 × |
| 0.9 | 0.81 | 4.33451 × | 2.18122 × |
| 1.0 | 1.00 | 5.43243 × | 2.98557 × |
Numerical results of Example 4 using the framelet systems and for .
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | 0.01 | 1.31612 × | 1.91626 × |
| 0.2 | 0.04 | 51.7061 × | 1.45913 × |
| 0.3 | 0.09 | 6.39942 × | 1.06851 × |
| 0.4 | 0.16 | 0.41406 × | 3.21467 × |
| 0.5 | 0.25 | 0.49218 × | 6.80432 × |
| 0.6 | 0.36 | 0.60156 × | 1.20816 × |
| 0.7 | 0.49 | 0.69531 × | 3.03948 × |
| 0.8 | 0.64 | 8.53345 × | 4.26697 × |
| 0.9 | 0.81 | 1.10689 × | 5.81013 × |
| 1.0 | 1.00 | 1.38297 × | 7.36015 × |
Numerical results of Example 5 using the framelet systems and for .
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | 0.01 | 1.62034 × | 8.34395 × |
| 0.2 | 0.04 | 1.03814 × | 5.23015 × |
| 0.3 | 0.09 | 3.56716 × | 1.85430 × |
| 0.4 | 0.16 | 7.48135 × | 3.84891 × |
| 0.5 | 0.25 | 1.45995 × | 6.85008 × |
| 0.6 | 0.36 | 2.32864 × | 1.10671 × |
| 0.7 | 0.49 | 3.47190 × | 1.73964 × |
| 0.8 | 0.64 | 5.19781 × | 2.46654 × |
| 0.9 | 0.81 | 7.05227 × | 3.56779 × |
| 1.0 | 1.00 | 9.28981 × | 4.45749 × |
Numerical results of Example 6 using the framelet systems and for .
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | 0.01 | 1.65534 × | 3.23863 × |
| 0.2 | 0.04 | 2.34587 × | 5.74663 × |
| 0.3 | 0.09 | 2.63882 × | 0.64773 × |
| 0.4 | 0.16 | 8.38292 × | 1.33748 × |
| 0.5 | 0.25 | 6.37474 × | 2.92292 × |
| 0.6 | 0.36 | 7.38381 × | 7.35377 × |
| 0.7 | 0.49 | 1.22234 × | 4.43444 × |
| 0.8 | 0.64 | 4.10292 × | 1.92556 × |
| 0.9 | 0.81 | 5.37333 × | 2.01111 × |
| 1.0 | 1.00 | 2.32444 × | 2.22298 × |
Figure 3A Comparison between the exact and approximate solutions of Example 3 for using the framelet systems and .
Figure 4Error plots for Example 3 when and using the framelet systems and .
Figure 5A Comparison between the exact and approximate solutions of Example 4 for using the framelet systems and .
Figure 6Error plots for Example 4 when using the framelet systems and .
Figure 7A Comparison between the exact and approximate solutions of Example 5 for using the framelet systems and .
Figure 8Error plots for Example 4 using the framelet systems and when .
Figure 9Matrix plot of the coefficients of the approximate solution of Example 5 based on the framelet systems and .
Figure 10A Comparison between the exact and approximate solutions of Example 6 for using the framelet systems and .