Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Take the following feedback system:

$\dot{x} = (\theta - k_1) x - k_2 x^3$

Now my book says:

For $\theta > k_1$, the equilibrium $x = 0$ is unstable. I wonder why...

Furthermore my book indicates that it is easy to see that $x(t)$ will converge to one of the two new equilibria $\pm \sqrt{\frac{\theta-k_1}{k_2}}$. Again, how did they obtain this result?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 3 down vote accepted

Question 1: From stability theory it is known, that

a fixed point $x^*$ of $\dot{x}=f(x)$ is stable $\Leftrightarrow$ all eigenvalues of the jacobian $f'(x^*)$ have negative real parts.

For $f(x)=(\theta - k_1) x - k_2 x^3$ and $x^*=0$ this restricts to $\theta<k_1$

Question 2: You can use the same argument.

For $\theta>k_1$ the new equilibria become stable, as (assuming $k_2>0$) we have

$$f'\left(\pm \sqrt{\frac{\theta-k_1}{k_2}}\right)=\theta-k_1-3k_2\frac{\theta-k_1}{k_2}=-2(\theta-k_1)<0$$

This fundamental change of the dynamics at $\theta=k_1$ is known as a pitchfork bifurcation.

share|cite|improve this answer

Starting with:

$$ \dot{x} = (\theta - k_{1})x - k_{2}x^{3} = V(x). $$ The equilibrium occurs at $\dot{x}=0$ i.e.

$$ (\theta - k_{1})x - k_{2}x^{2} = 0 = x\left[(\theta - k_{1}) - k_{2}x^{2}\right] $$ so clearly the stationary points occur, $ x_{0} = 0 $ and when $$ (\theta - k_{1}) - k_{2}x^{2} = 0 $$ To compute the other fixed point we utilise $x^{2} =\frac{(\theta - k_{1})}{k_{2}}$ which you can probably carry from here with.

To prove the stability criteria of the points i.e. the nature of the points you linearise about the stationary points $x_{0}$'s using $x = x_{0} + \delta x$, and inserting into your original ode as follows,

$$ \dot{\delta x} = \frac{\partial V}{\partial x} $$

where the last term is evaluated at the fixed points. This leads to $$ \dot{\delta x} = (\theta - k_{1}) + 3k_{2}x_{0}^{2}\delta x $$ Solving this for $\delta x$ will show how perturbations of the fixed points behave.

share|cite|improve this answer

Suppose $\theta - k_1 = k_3 > 0$.

Then $\dot{x} = k_3 x - k_2 x^3.$

If $k_2 \le 0, \dot{x}$ has the same sign as $x$, so $x(t)$ will tend to go further away from 0.

Even if $k_2 > 0,$ for sufficiently small $x, |k_3 x| > |k_2 x^3|,$ so $\dot{x}$ will have the same sign as $x$, so $x(t)$ will tend to go further away from 0.

I.e. 0 is unstable.

You can get the result of where the equilibria are by solving $$\begin{align} 0 = \dot{x} & = (\theta - k_1) x - k_2 x^3 \\ & = x(\theta - k_1 - k_2 x^2) \\ & = x(\sqrt{\theta-k_1} + \sqrt{k_2} x)(\sqrt{\theta-k_1} - \sqrt{k_2} x). \end{align} $$

So the graph of $\dot{x}$ against $x$ is an (anti-symmetric ) cubic. If $k_2 > 0$ the graph slopes down to $-\infty$ as $x \rightarrow + \infty$. I.e. for the equilibrium at $\sqrt{\frac{\theta-k_1}{k_2}}$ the graph is negative for $x$ > equilibrium (leading $x(t)$ down to the equilibrium) and positive for $x$ < equilibrium (leading $x(t)$ up to the equilibrium). I.e. the equilibrium at $\sqrt{\frac{\theta-k_1}{k_2}}$ is stable.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.