Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Given the Butcher table $$ \begin{array}{ccc} \Theta & \Big | & \Theta \\\ --&--&-- \\\ & | & 1\end{array}$$

I would like to

a) write down the corresponding evolution $\Psi$

b) find the stability function $S(z)$ of the "$\Theta$-method"

Somehow, I end up getting the Euler method but I don't know why. I would be very grateful if someone could point out my mistake to me. So here is what I did:

a) The RK formula is $$ c_i := \sum_{j=1}^s a_{ij}$$ $$ k_i := f(t_0 + c_i h, y_0 + h \sum_{j=1}^s a_{ij} k_j)$$ $$ \Psi^{t_0, t_0 + h} y_0 := y_0 + h \sum_{i=1}^s b_i k_i$$

Padding the Butcher table with zeros, I get the following Runge Kutta coefficients:

$c_1 = 0$, $c_2 = \Theta$

$a_{11}= a_{12} = a_{22} = 0$, $a_{21} = \Theta$

$b_1 = 1$, $b_2 = 0$

$k_1 = f(t + c_1 h, y_0 + h(a_{11}k_1 + a_{12} k_2) = f(t, y_0)$

$k_2 = f(t + \Theta h, y_0 + h(a_{21}k_1 + a_{22}k_2)) = f(t + h\Theta , y_0 + h \Theta f(t, y_0))$

It's a two step RK method, i.e. s = 2 and my $\Psi$ is:

$$ \Psi^{t_0 , t_0 + h} y_0 = y_0 + h(b_1 k_1 + b_2 k_2) = y_0 + h f(t_0, y_0)$$

b) The stability function of the Euler method is $S(z) = 1 + z$

I know that this is wrong because this is an old exam question and the stability function they give in their solution is $S(z) = \frac{1 + (1 - \Theta)z}{1 - \Theta z}$.

I've done it 4 times, getting the Euler method which does not depend on $\Theta$. I would be very grateful if someone could help me with this. Many thanks in advance.

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 1 down vote accepted

Why do you think this is a two-step method? Take $s=1$, consider the given method as an implicit one-step method (you do not need to pad the Butcher tableau with zeroes), and you should get the stability function you want.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you! I padded the table because I am scared of implicit methods. Seriously: thank you so much, I have no idea why I filled the table with zeros. –  Matt N. Jan 27 '11 at 13:32

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.