Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Analysis of Spectral Hamiltonian Boundary Value Methods (SHBVMs) for the numerical solution of ODE problems

Pierluigi Amodio, Luigi Brugnano, Felice Iavernaro

TL;DR

This work analyzes SHBVMs, i.e., Hamiltonian Boundary Value Methods used as spectral methods in time, for solving ODEs arising from Hamiltonian systems. It develops a spectral time discretization by projecting the vector field onto a Legendre subspace and establishes decay bounds for the Fourier coefficients $\gamma_j$ under analyticity, supporting spectral convergence. SHBVMs are then constructed by computing $\gamma_j(\sigma)$ with Gauss–Legendre quadrature (order $2k$, with $k=\max\{20,s+2\}$) and solving a reduced $s$-dimensional discrete system via a blended Newton iteration that leverages a small, precomputed matrix $\Sigma$, enabling high-order, spectrally accurate time stepping. Numerical tests on the Kepler problem, a Lotka–Volterra Poisson system, and a stiff ODE validate the theory, showing invariant conservation and favorable efficiency relative to standard ODE solvers, thus supporting SHBVMs as robust general-purpose ODE solvers for challenging Hamiltonian problems.

Abstract

Recently, the numerical solution of stiffly/highly-oscillatory Hamiltonian problems has been attacked by using Hamiltonian Boundary Value Methods (HBVMs) as spectral methods in time. While a theoretical analysis of this spectral approach has been only partially addressed, there is enough numerical evidence that it turns out to be very effective even when applied to a wider range of problems. Here we fill this gap by providing a thorough convergence analysis of the methods and confirm the theoretical results with the aid of a few numerical tests.

Analysis of Spectral Hamiltonian Boundary Value Methods (SHBVMs) for the numerical solution of ODE problems

TL;DR

This work analyzes SHBVMs, i.e., Hamiltonian Boundary Value Methods used as spectral methods in time, for solving ODEs arising from Hamiltonian systems. It develops a spectral time discretization by projecting the vector field onto a Legendre subspace and establishes decay bounds for the Fourier coefficients under analyticity, supporting spectral convergence. SHBVMs are then constructed by computing with Gauss–Legendre quadrature (order , with ) and solving a reduced -dimensional discrete system via a blended Newton iteration that leverages a small, precomputed matrix , enabling high-order, spectrally accurate time stepping. Numerical tests on the Kepler problem, a Lotka–Volterra Poisson system, and a stiff ODE validate the theory, showing invariant conservation and favorable efficiency relative to standard ODE solvers, thus supporting SHBVMs as robust general-purpose ODE solvers for challenging Hamiltonian problems.

Abstract

Recently, the numerical solution of stiffly/highly-oscillatory Hamiltonian problems has been attacked by using Hamiltonian Boundary Value Methods (HBVMs) as spectral methods in time. While a theoretical analysis of this spectral approach has been only partially addressed, there is enough numerical evidence that it turns out to be very effective even when applied to a wider range of problems. Here we fill this gap by providing a thorough convergence analysis of the methods and confirm the theoretical results with the aid of a few numerical tests.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 5 sections, 6 theorems, 69 equations, 1 figure, 3 tables.

Key Result

Lemma 1

Let $g:[0,h]\rightarrow V$, with $V$ a vector space, admit a Taylor expansion at 0. Then

Figures (1)

  • Figure 1: behavior of $|\hat{\gamma}_j|$ for decreasing values of the time-step $h$ for the Kepler problem (\ref{['kepl']})--(\ref{['kepl0']}) solved by the HBVM(20,16) method with decreasing time-steps. The line with circles are the computed norms, whereas the asterisks are the estimated ones. Observe that, for the smallest time-steps, the computed norms stagnate near the round-off error level.

Theorems & Definitions (9)

  • Lemma 1
  • Corollary 1
  • Lemma 2
  • Lemma 3
  • Theorem 1
  • Remark 1
  • Theorem 2
  • Remark 2
  • Remark 3