Research article

Linearization and computation for large-strain visco-elasticity

  • Received: 29 October 2021 Revised: 23 March 2022 Accepted: 28 March 2022 Published: 06 May 2022
  • Time-discrete numerical minimization schemes for simple visco-elastic materials in the Kelvin-Voigt rheology at high strains are not well posed because of the non-quasi-convexity of the dissipation functional. A possible solution is to resort to non-simple material models with higher-order gradients of deformations. However, this makes numerical computations much more involved. Here, we propose another approach that relies on local minimizers of the simple material model. Computational tests are provided that show a very good agreement between our model and the original.

    Citation: Patrick Dondl, Martin Jesenko, Martin Kružík, Jan Valdman. Linearization and computation for large-strain visco-elasticity[J]. Mathematics in Engineering, 2023, 5(2): 1-15. doi: 10.3934/mine.2023030

    Related Papers:

    [1] B. M. Adams, H. T. Banks, Hee-Dae Kwon, Hien T. Tran . Dynamic Multidrug Therapies for HIV: Optimal and STI Control Approaches. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2004, 1(2): 223-241. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2004.1.223
    [2] Haifeng Zhang, Jinzhi Lei . Optimal treatment strategy of cancers with intratumor heterogeneity. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(12): 13337-13373. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022625
    [3] Ghassen Haddad, Amira Kebir, Nadia Raissi, Amira Bouhali, Slimane Ben Miled . Optimal control model of tumor treatment in the context of cancer stem cell. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(5): 4627-4642. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022214
    [4] Pedro José Gutiérrez-Diez, Jose Russo . Design of personalized cancer treatments by use of optimal control problems: The case of chronic myeloid leukemia. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(5): 4773-4800. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020261
    [5] Gesham Magombedze, Winston Garira, Eddie Mwenje . Modelling the immunopathogenesis of HIV-1 infection and the effect of multidrug therapy: The role of fusion inhibitors in HAART. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2008, 5(3): 485-504. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2008.5.485
    [6] Jerzy Klamka, Helmut Maurer, Andrzej Swierniak . Local controllability and optimal control for\newline a model of combined anticancer therapy with control delays. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2017, 14(1): 195-216. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2017013
    [7] Urszula Ledzewicz, Shuo Wang, Heinz Schättler, Nicolas André, Marie Amélie Heng, Eddy Pasquier . On drug resistance and metronomic chemotherapy: A mathematical modeling and optimal control approach. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2017, 14(1): 217-235. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2017014
    [8] Gordon Akudibillah, Abhishek Pandey, Jan Medlock . Optimal control for HIV treatment. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(1): 373-396. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019018
    [9] Shuo Wang, Heinz Schättler . Optimal control of a mathematical model for cancer chemotherapy under tumor heterogeneity. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2016, 13(6): 1223-1240. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2016040
    [10] Urszula Ledzewicz, Heinz Schättler . The Influence of PK/PD on the Structure of Optimal Controls in Cancer Chemotherapy Models. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2005, 2(3): 561-578. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2005.2.561
  • Time-discrete numerical minimization schemes for simple visco-elastic materials in the Kelvin-Voigt rheology at high strains are not well posed because of the non-quasi-convexity of the dissipation functional. A possible solution is to resort to non-simple material models with higher-order gradients of deformations. However, this makes numerical computations much more involved. Here, we propose another approach that relies on local minimizers of the simple material model. Computational tests are provided that show a very good agreement between our model and the original.



    The Eurostat published yearly data to disclose the development of the single 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Europe (Eurostat, 2020a). Sustainable development comprises the 3 pillars of sustainability, i.e., economically viable decisions, environmentally sound decisions, and socially equitable decisions (Future Learn, 2021). Decent work and Economic growth (SDG 8) have legs in both the economic as well as in the social areas. The development of SDG 8 can be elucidated through the development of five main indicators (Eurostat, 2020a), i.e., Real GDP (Eurostat, 2020b), Investment share of GDP by institutional sectors (Eurostat, 2020c), Young people neither in employment nor in education and training (Eurostat, 2020d), Employment rate (Eurostat, 2020e) and Long-term unemployment rate (Eurostat, 2020f) have been applied. The overall objective of the study is to disclose the mutual state of compliance among the European Union member states about the Sustainable Development Goal No. 8, i.e., Decent work and Economic growth, based on the five main indicators reported by Eurostat. Further it is an aim to provide an analytical tool for decision support that enable authorities, decision makers and regulators to pinpoint for which areas, given by the indicators that needs allocation of resources to increase the compliance with SDG 8 for the country. In Table 1 the Eurostat description of the five indicators is given.

    Table 1.  Main indicators for SDG 8: decent work and economic growth.
    Indicator Description
    GDP Gross domestic product (GDP) is a measure of economic activity and is commonly used as a proxy for changes in a country's material living standards. It refers to the value of total final output of goods and services produced by an economy within a certain time period. Real GDP per capita is calculated as the ratio of real GDP (GDP adjusted for inflation) to the average population of a specific year and is based on rounded figures.
    INV Investment share of GDP measures the investment for the total economy, government and business, as well as household sectors. The indicator is calculated as the share of GDP used for gross investment. It is defined as gross fixed capital formation (GFCF) expressed as a percentage of GDP for the government, business and household sectors.
    NEET A considerable proportion of young people aged 15 to 29 in the EU are economically inactive. For some this is due to the pursuit of education and training. Others, however, have withdrawn from the labour market or are not entering it after leaving the education system. Those who struggle with the transition from education to work are captured by the statistics on young people who are neither in employment, education nor training (NEET rate).
    EmpR The employment rate is defined as the percentage of employed persons in relation to the comparable total population. The data analysed here focus on the population aged 20 to 64 with the view of monitoring the Europe 2020 strategy target of raising employment rates among this age group to 75 % by 2020.
    LtUR Long-term unemployment is measured for economically active people (which includes both employed and unemployed people) aged 15 to 74 who have been unemployed for 12 months or more. Long-term unemployment increases the risk of falling into poverty and has negative implications for society as a whole. Long-term unemployed people in the EU have about half the chance of finding employment as those who are short-term unemployed.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Previous studies have focused on the development within the single indicators over the years (Eurostat, 2020a). However, analyses taking all 5 main indicators simultaneous have not previously been reported. The present study takes its onset in analyses for the years 2010, i.e., 5 years prior to the adoption of the 17 SDGs, 2015, i.e., the year the SDGs were adopted and 2019, the latest year where a virtually complete data set is available (Eurostat, 2020a). The datasets analyzed comprises 27 EU member states plus population averaged values for the EU (EU27) and the five main indicators for all 28 entries. Thus, we are dealing with a multi-indicator system (MIS). Over time MISs have been analyzed by various approaches, like ELECTRE (Roy and Bouyssou, 1986; Colorni et al., 2001) and PROMETHEE (Brans and Vincke, 1985). However, none of these method takes into account all indicators simultaneously without any pretreatment. In contrast to this partial ordering constitutes an advantageous method that allows to take into account all indicators without any pretreatment (Brüggemann and Patil, 2011; Carlsen and Brüggemann, 2018), like, e.g., aggregation thus avoiding loss of information about the role of the single indicators, e.g., due to compensation effects (Munda, 2008). In a recent paper (Carlsen, 2021) the advantageous use of partial ordering compared to the use of aggregated indicators has been elucidated.

    In the following section the theoretical background for the methodology is briefly described. For further deepening the given references should be consulted.

    The analyses comprise overall analyses including all 5 indicators using the total value for each indicator. Further specialized analyses comprising the employment situation for males and females as well as various investment profiles, i.e., business, government, and household contributions. The 27 European Union (EU) members as well as the values for the EU, EU27, have been included in the single analyses (Appendix 1 for the applied ISO 3166-1 country codes).

    Partial ordering is a relation among the objects to be ordered. In mathematical terms the only relation is "≤" (Brüggemann and Patil, 2011; Carlsen, 2018; Carlsen and Brüggemann, 2018). Hence, the "≤" relation is the basis for a comparison of objects and constitutes a graph, the so-called Hasse diagram (see below). Two objects are connected to each other if and only if the relation "x ≤ y" holds. A given object, x, is characterized by the a set of indicators rj (x), j = 1, ..., m, and can thus be compared to another object y, characterized by an identical set of indicators rj (y), if

    ri(x)ri(y) for   all  i=1,……,m (1)

    It is obvious that Equation 1 is a rather strict requirement for having a comparison as at least one indicator value of object x must be lower (the remaining lower or at least equal) to those of object y. In technical terms: Let X be the group of objects studied, i.e., X = {O1, O2, O3, ……, On}, then object Oy will be ranked higher than object Ox, i.e., Ox < Oy if at least one of the indicator values for Oy is higher than the corresponding indicator value for Ox and no indicator for Oy is lower than the corresponding indicator value for Ox. On the other hand, if rj (Oy) > rj (Ox) for some indicator j and ri (Oy) < ri (Ox) for some other indicator i, Oy and Ox will be called incomparable (notation: Oy || Ox) due to the mathematical contradiction expressed by the conflicting indicator values. A set of comparable objects are called a chain, whereas a set of mutually incomparable objects is called an antichain. In cases where all indicator values for two objects, Oy and Ox, are equal, i.e., rj (Oy) = rj (Ox) for all j, the two objects will be considered as equivalent, i.e., Ox–Oy, which in terms of ranking means that they will have the same rank.

    The Equation 1 is the basis for the so-called Hasse diagram technique (HDT) (Brüggemann and Patil, 2011; Brüggemann and Carlsen, 2006). Hasse diagrams are visual representations of partial orders. In a Hasse diagram comparable objects are connected by a sequence of lines (Brüggemann and Patil, 2011; Brüggemann and Münzer, 1993; ). Thus, sets of comparable objects, i.e., fulfilling Equation 1 are called chains that in the diagram are connected with lines, whereas sets of mutually incomparable objects, i.e., not fulfilling Equation 1 are called antichains.

    In the diagram the single objects are positioned in levels, typically arranged from low to high (bottom to top in the diagram). It is a general rule that objects are located as high in the diagram as possible. Thus, isolated objects will, by default be located at the top level of the diagram. It is important to make sure that the orientation of the single indicators is identical, e.g., that high values correspond to good whereas low values correspond to bad. In practice this is done by multiplying indicator values by –1 in case where high and low values correspond to bad and good, respectively (cf. 2.5). In the present study the highest located object/country will be assigned rank 1 indicating the best.

    The module mHDCl7_1 of the PyHasse software (vide infra) was used for the basic partial ordering calculations and the associated construction of the Hasse diagrams.

    The relative importance of the single indicators in play can be determined through a sensitivity analysis (Brüggemann et al., 2001). The basic idea is to construct partial ordered sets (posets) excluding the single indicators one at the time. Subsequently, the distances from these posets to the original poset are determined. The indicator, whose elimination from the original poset leads to the maximal distance to the original one, in other words causing the highest degree of changes in the Hasse diagram is most important for the structure of the original partial order. As the effect of elimination single indicators is studied, this kind of sensitivity analysis can be called indicator-related sensitivity. The sensitivity values were calculated by the sensitivity23_1 module of the PyHasse software (vide infra).

    Looking at the Hasse diagram, the level structure constitutes a first approximation to ordering. However, as all objects in a level automatically will be assigned identical orders such an ordering will obviously cause many tied orders. Obviously, it is desirable with a degree of tiedness as low as possible. Hence, ultimately a linear ordering of the single objects is desirable. However, when incomparable objects are included in the ordering, this is obviously not immediately obtainable. Partial order methodology provides a weak order, where tied orders are not excluded, which is obtained by calculating the average order of the single objects as, e.g., described by Brüggemann and Carlsen (2011) and Brüggemann and Annoni (2014).

    The average rankings were calculated applying the LPOMext8_5 (Brüggemann and Carlsen, 2011) of the PyHasse software (vide infra).

    All partial order analyses were carried out using the PyHasse software (Brüggemann et al., 2014). PyHasse is programmed using the interpreter language Python (version 2.6). Today, the software package contains more than 100 specialized modules and is available upon request from the developer, Dr. R. Brüggemann (brg_home@web.de). A web-based version (PyHasse, 2020) is under construction.

    It should be noted that the partial ordering methodology is under constant development and is used in a varity of disciples (Brüggemann and Carlsen, 2006; Brüggemann et al., 2014; Fattore and Brüggemann, 2017; Silan et al., 2021).

    The indicators applied for this study have been summarized in Table 2. It is noted that the indicator describing the investment profiles is subdivided into total investments and investments from business, governments, and households, respectively, whereas the indicators describing employment profiles are subdivided into total, males, and females, respectively. The total investments equal the sum of the investments from business, governments and households and the total employment indicators equals the sum of the indicators for males and females, respectively.

    Table 2.  Indicators applied for the SDG 8 analyses.
    ID Description Subdivision Orientation
    GDP Real GDP Total the higher the better
    INV Investment share of GDP by institutional sectors Total
    Business
    Government
    Household
    the higher the better
    NEET Young people neither in employment nor in education and training Total
    Males
    Females
    the lower the better
    EmpR Employment rate Total
    Males
    Females
    the higher the better
    LtUR Long-term unemployment rate Total
    Males
    Females
    the lower the better

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    In the appendices 2–6 the data for the partial ordering analyses are shown. It should be noted (cf. Table 2) that to have a joint orientation of all indicators, i.e., ranging from bad (low values) to good (high values) negative values for NEET and LtUR are used.

    Decent work and economic growth are both important elements in legs in both the economic as well as in the social areas of sustainable development.

    The first set of analyses comprises all 27 EU member states plus the European Union (EU27) as a reference for comparison applying the total values for the five main indicators, i.e., GDP, INV, NEET, EmpR and LtUR (cf. Table 1) for the years 2010, 2015 and 2019, respectively, the indicator values are shown in Appendix 2. In Figure 1 the corresponding Hasse diagrams (cf. sect. 2.3) are shown.

    Figure 1.  Hasse diagrams displaying the mutual ration between the 27 EU member states, the population averaged values for the European Union (EU27) being included as a reference.

    From Figure 1 it is immediate noted that countries like CZE, DNK LUX, NLD and SWE for all 3 years are found in the top level of the diagrams indicating that these countries have among the highest level of decent work and economic growth within the EU, whereas, e.g., GRC are found in the bottom of the diagrams. Further the significant drop of CYP from 2010 to 2015 should be mentioned. It should in this connection be noted that the level structure of the Hasse diagrams (Figure 1) only gives a first indication of the mutual ranking of the countries as all countries at the same level will be ascribed identical rank.

    A more elaborate disclosure of the mutual ranking of the 27 EU member states are obtained by estimating the average rank (cf. sect. 2.5) of the single countries (Table 3).

    Table 3.  Average rank of the 27 EU member states for the years 2010, 2015 and 2019, including the European Union (EU27) as reference.
    ID 2010 2015 2019
    AUT 2 3 2
    BEL 9 12 13
    BGR 24 26 27
    CYP 4 22 20
    CZE 5 4 3
    DEU 14 9 7
    DNK 11 6 5
    ESP 19 23 23
    EST 20 8 10
    EU27 13 14 14
    FIN 3 11 8
    FRA 7 13 15
    GRC 26 27 28
    HRV 22, 5 28 26
    HUN 25 17 9
    IRL 17 7 4
    ITA 21 25 25
    LTU 27 20 19
    LUX 8 10 12
    LVA 28 16 17
    MLT 15 5 11
    NLD 6 2 6
    POL 18 21 18
    PRT 16 24 21
    ROU 12 18 24
    SVK 22, 5 19 22
    SVN 10 15 16
    SWE 1 1 1

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    From the data in Table 4 it is immediate noted that EU27 appears stable with an average rank of 13, 14 and 14 for the three years, indicating that on an overall basis only little have happened in the European Union over the years. Countries being ranked higher (lower values) apparently on an average basis are doing better that the European average whereas countries with lower ranks than the EU27 (higher values) are doing worse than the average and as such appear to be challenged to reach at least the average level within the EU. Sweden (SWE) is found in the top for all three years closely followed by Austria (AUT) apart from 2015 where the second place was taken by NLD.

    Table 4.  Average ranking of the 27 EU member states plus EU27 based on the three investment indicators INV-bus, INV-gov and INV-hh.
    ID 2010 2015 2019
    AUT 19 8 6
    BEL 16.5 6 7
    BGR 11 16 na
    CYP 7 26 11
    CZE 1 2 3
    DEU 24 16 8
    DNK 26 18.5 10
    ESP 5 24 22
    EST 19 3 1
    EU27 10 11.5 16
    FIN 4 6 4
    FRA 3 7 5
    GRC 21 25 25
    HRV 14 21 17
    HUN 14 9 2
    IRL 27 16 13
    ITA 12 23 23
    LTU 23 18.5 19
    LUX 25 22 na
    LVA 19 14 9
    NLD 22 11.5 12
    POL 8 10 21
    PRT 6 27 24
    ROU 2 1 14
    SVK 14 4 18
    SVN 9 20 20
    SWE 16.5 13 15

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    As the ranking of the countries is based on the five main indicators, it is of obvious interest to disclose the relative importance of the single indicators and hereby give authorities and decision makers a further tool to pinpoint specific areas for improvement. In Figure 2 the relative importance of the five indicators for the three studied years are displayed. It is (Figure 2) immediate noted, not surprising, that the indicators GDP and INV have the highest influence on decent work and economic growth with a combined relative importance of 0.7–0.9, whereas the remaining three indicators, reflecting various aspects of employment (cf. Table 1) apparently are of less importance in achieving the SDG 8. This may be found surprising as on increased labor force would be expected to have a positive influence on the two economic indicators, GDP and INV. A further somewhat surprising finding is that, especially for the years 2010 and 2019, the calculations disclosed that the INV indicator for LUX is unexpected low compared to the general trend among the 27 member states plus EU27, even though the GDP for LUX is the highest within the EU27 (cf. Appendix 2).

    Figure 2.  Relative importance of the five indicators.

    The investment profiles for the single countries consist of three elements, i.e., business investments (INV-bus), government investments (INV-gov) and private household investments (INV-hh), respectively. Based on these three indicators (cf. Table 5) a partial ordering analysis were performed for the three years included in the study. In Table 5 the overall ranking of the investments for the 27 countries plus EU27 is shown for the three years investigated.

    Table 5.  Average ranking of the 27 EU member states plus EU27 based on the three employment indicators NEET, EmpR and LtUR.
    2010 2015 2019
    ID Total Males Females Total Males Females Total Males Females
    AUT 3 4 4 5 7 4 8 9 11
    BEL 12 16.5 10 18 22 17 20 23 18
    BGR 22 25 24 24 23 23 23 22 22
    CYP 6 5 8 22 24 22 19 15 19
    CZE 10 6 16 7 1 11 3 1 5
    DEU 7 8 9 3 4 2 4 6 3
    DNK 4 7 1.5 2 3 3 6 7 4
    ESP 27 23 25 25.5 26 24.5 26 26 25
    EST 18 24 15 8 8 9 7 5 9
    EU27 16 15 13 20 16 21 18 19 20
    FIN 8 9 6 9 11 7 9 16 6
    FRA 11 16.5 11 15 20 12 22 24 21
    GRC 19 13 28 28 28 28 27.5 28 27
    HRV 23 22 22 25.5 27 24.5 25 25 23
    HUN 25 21 23 16 10 19 16 10 17
    IRL 21 26 19 17 15 14 14 12 13
    ITA 24 19 26 27 25 27 27.5 27 28
    LTU 20 27 12 10 13 8 13 18 8
    LUX 5 2 5 6 5 6 10 14 10
    LVA 28 28 20 12 18 10 15 21 12
    MLT 17 11 21 11 9 18 5 4 7
    NLD 1 1 3 4 6 5 2 2 2
    POL 14 14 17 14 12 15 12 8 16
    PRT 15 18 14 19 21 16 17 13 15
    ROU 13 12 18 21 19 20 24 17 24
    SVK 26 20 27 23 17 26 21 20 26
    SVN 9 10 7 13 14 13 11 11 14
    SWE 2 3 1.5 1 2 1 1 3 1

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    It is immediately noted that the average rank of the EU27 is decreasing from rank 10 in 2010 to 11, 5 in 2015 and 16 in 2019, which is indicative that an increasing number of countries have increased the investments to a level higher that the average EU27 level. Thus, significant increases in the investments are, e.g., EST that increased from 19 to 3 to 1 for the years 2010, 2015 and 2019, respectively. Surprisingly, some of the so-called rich-countries like DNK, SWE and LUX (cf. discussion above) are found well below the EU27 level.

    Further it is interesting to disclose which of the three indicators that have the more pronounced influence on the investment picture (Figure 3).

    Figure 3.  Relative importance of the three investment indicators.

    It is immediately noted that the private, household, investment (INV-hh) for all three years is the most influential indicator that even further increases over the years, followed by the business and government investments that more or less play identical roles. Although the absolute value for, e.g., INV-bus are significantly higher that for the private investment (INV-hh) the relatively high importance of the INV-hh should be noted and should probably be further encouraged (for data cf. Appendix 3).

    The employment situations, total as well as for males and females, respectively, in the studied countries are summarized in Appendix 4–6 based on the three employment indicators NEET, EmpR and LtUR (cf. table 2). The lower the values mare for NEET and LtUR the better, whereas higher values reflect a better state for EmpR. In Table 5 the average rankings are summarized for 2010, 2015 and 2019, respectively.

    Several striking features can be seen from the data in Table 8. Hence, first it can be noted that the ranking of EU27 appears fairly stable although relatively decreasing especially for females. At the top ranks we find, e.g., SWE, NLD and DNK, whereas ESP, SVK, GRC and ITA are found at rather low ranks, GRC even decreasing over the years, which probably can be ascribed to the economic crisis in the country. Thus, GRC and ITA are found at the very bottom in the 2019 analysis for in total as well as for males and females. It is further noteworthy that in the case of CZE a significant increase over the years develops and for CZE-males even appears at rank 1 for both 2015 and 2019.

    It turns out that relative importance of the three indicators is rather similar although a slight tendency, especially in the case of females that the long-term unemployment rate (LtUR) is slightly dominating on the expense of NEET and EmpR in the ranking of the employment situations. Hence, based on these analyses it appears not surprising that the task to fight unemployment and getting young people on the labor market is still an important task, especially in, e.g., the South European countries.

    Based on five main indicators, real GDP (GDP), investment share of GDP by institutional sectors (INV), young people neither in employment nor in education and training (NEET), employment rate (EmpR) and long-term unemployment rate (LtUR) the paper has described the mutual relation between the 27 European Union member states using the population averaged values for the European Union (EU27) as a reference in order to disclose the state of the single countries within the Union in their attempt to comply with the Sustainable Development Goal No. 8 (SDG 8), Decent work and Economic growth. Three set of analyses, applying partial order methodology have been performed: (1) an overall analysis taken all five indicators simultaneously into account (Table 3). (2) the investment profiles of the countries applying investment from business, government of households as indicators (Table 4) and (3) the employment situation in the single countries with the NEET, EmpR and LtUR as indicators (Table 5). This analysis for carried out for the total population, the male population, and the female population.

    In all cases the average ranking of the 27 member states plus the EU27 were derived as well as the more important indicators for the actual ranking. Rather clear-cut pictures developed and as such the results constitute a potentially valuable decision support tool for politicians, authorities, and regulators in attempts to focus on specific areas that eventually will bring the given country in compliance with the SDG 8. Further the results give an indication of the actual situation within the EU, i.e., which countries are higher (or better) than the average Union and which countries are lower (worse) and gain valuable support to specific focus areas for the single countries to improve their relative state within the EU.

    The partial order methodology that allows inclusion of several indicators simultaneously without any pretreatment such as aggregation has here been demonstrated to constitute a highly advantageous decision support tool not only to mutually rank the single countries but, possibly from a decision makers perspective even more important to disclose the relative influence of the single indicators as this is not disguised through some more or less subjective aggregation, which is often seen in studies analyzing multi-indicator systems.

    The method can without difficulties be applied to other multi-indicator systems (MIS).

    The author declares no conflicts of interest in this paper.



    [1] S. S. Antman, Physically unacceptable viscous stresses, Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 49 (1998), 980–988. https://doi.org/10.1007/s000330050134 doi: 10.1007/s000330050134
    [2] S. S. Antman, Nonlinear problems of elasticity, 2 Eds., New York: Springer, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-27649-1
    [3] J. M. Ball, Y. Şengül, Quasistatic nonlinear viscoelasticity and gradient flows, J. Dyn. Diff. Equat., 27 (2015), 405–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10884-014-9410-1 doi: 10.1007/s10884-014-9410-1
    [4] F. K. Bogner, R. L. Fox, L. A. Schmit, The generation of interelement compatible stiffness and mass matrices by the use of interpolation formulas, In: Proc. Conf. Matrix Methods in Struct. Mech, AirForce Inst. of Tech, Wright Patterson AF Base, Ohio, 1965,397–444.
    [5] Y. Chen, T. A. Davis, W. W. Hager, S. Rajamanickam, Algorithm 887: CHOLMOD, Supernodal sparse Cholesky factorization and update/downdate, ACM Trans. Math. Software, 35 (2008), 22. https://doi.org/10.1145/1391989.1391995 doi: 10.1145/1391989.1391995
    [6] B. Dacorogna, Direct methods in the calculus of variations, 2 Eds., New York: Springer, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-55249-1
    [7] G. Dal Maso, M. Negri, D. Percivale, Linearized elasticity as Γ-limit of finite elasticity, Set-Valued Analysis, 10 (2002), 165–183. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016577431636 doi: 10.1023/A:1016577431636
    [8] M. Friedrich, M. Kružík, On the passage from nonlinear to linearized viscoelasticity, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 50 (2018), 4426–4456. https://doi.org/10.1137/17M1131428 doi: 10.1137/17M1131428
    [9] M. Friedrich, M. Kružík, J. Valdman, Numerical approximation of von Kármán viscoelastic plates, Discrete Cont. Dyn. Syst. S, 14 (2021), 299–319. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdss.2020322 doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020322
    [10] G. Friesecke, R. D. James, S. Müller, A hierarchy of plate models derived from nonlinear elasticity by Gamma-convergence, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 180 (2006), 183–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00205-005-0400-7 doi: 10.1007/s00205-005-0400-7
    [11] S. Krömer, T. Roubíček, Quasistatic viscoelasticity with self-contact at large strains, J. Elast., 142 (2020), 433–445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10659-020-09801-9 doi: 10.1007/s10659-020-09801-9
    [12] A. Mielke, C. Ortner, Y. Şengül, An approach to nonlinear viscoelasticity via metric gradient flows, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 46 (2014), 1317–1347. https://doi.org/10.1137/130927632 doi: 10.1137/130927632
    [13] P. Neff, On Korn's first inequality with non-constant coefficients, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. A, 132 (2002), 221–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0308210500001591 doi: 10.1017/S0308210500001591
    [14] J. Valdman, MATLAB implementation of {C1 finite elements: Bogner-Fox-Schmit rectangle, In: Parallel processing and applied mathematics. PPAM 2019, Cham: Springer, 2020,256–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43222-5_22
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Anne Cori, Neil M. Ferguson, Christophe Fraser, Simon Cauchemez, A New Framework and Software to Estimate Time-Varying Reproduction Numbers During Epidemics, 2013, 178, 1476-6256, 1505, 10.1093/aje/kwt133
    2. Mudassar Imran, Adnan Khan, Ali R. Ansari, Syed Touqeer Hussain Shah, Modeling transmission dynamics of Ebola virus disease, 2017, 10, 1793-5245, 1750057, 10.1142/S1793524517500577
    3. Mohsin Ali, Mudassar Imran, Adnan Khan, Analysis and prediction of the COVID-19 outbreak in Pakistan, 2020, 14, 1751-3758, 730, 10.1080/17513758.2020.1814883
    4. Naveen K. Vaidya, Libin Rong, Modeling Pharmacodynamics on HIV Latent Infection: Choice of Drugs is Key to Successful Cure via Early Therapy, 2017, 77, 0036-1399, 1781, 10.1137/16M1092003
    5. Eunha Shim, Gretchen B. Chapman, Jeffrey P. Townsend, Alison P. Galvani, The influence of altruism on influenza vaccination decisions, 2012, 9, 1742-5689, 2234, 10.1098/rsif.2012.0115
    6. Karen M. Campbell, C. D. Lin, Sopon Iamsirithaworn, Thomas W. Scott, The Complex Relationship between Weather and Dengue Virus Transmission in Thailand, 2013, 89, 0002-9637, 1066, 10.4269/ajtmh.13-0321
    7. Hugues Turbé, Mina Bjelogrlic, Arnaud Robert, Christophe Gaudet-Blavignac, Jean-Philippe Goldman, Christian Lovis, Adaptive Time-Dependent Priors and Bayesian Inference to Evaluate SARS-CoV-2 Public Health Measures Validated on 31 Countries, 2021, 8, 2296-2565, 10.3389/fpubh.2020.583401
    8. 2018, 9781118280249, 694, 10.1002/9781118280249.refs
    9. Jean-Baptiste Burie, Michel Langlais, Agnès Calonnec, Switching from a mechanistic model to a continuous model to study at different scales the effect of vine growth on the dynamic of a powdery mildew epidemic, 2011, 107, 1095-8290, 885, 10.1093/aob/mcq233
    10. Vitor Silva, Nicole Paul, Potential impact of earthquakes during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, 2021, 37, 8755-2930, 73, 10.1177/8755293020950328
    11. Naveen K. Vaidya, Lindi M. Wahl, Avian Influenza Dynamics Under Periodic Environmental Conditions, 2015, 75, 0036-1399, 443, 10.1137/140966642
    12. José Paulo Carvalho dos Santos, Lislaine Cristina Cardoso, Evandro Monteiro, Nelson H. T. Lemes, A Fractional-Order Epidemic Model for Bovine Babesiosis Disease and Tick Populations, 2015, 2015, 1085-3375, 1, 10.1155/2015/729894
    13. Quan-Hui Liu, Marco Ajelli, Alberto Aleta, Stefano Merler, Yamir Moreno, Alessandro Vespignani, Measurability of the epidemic reproduction number in data-driven contact networks, 2018, 115, 0027-8424, 12680, 10.1073/pnas.1811115115
    14. Erin N. Bodine, Connor Cook, Mikayla Shorten, The potential impact of a prophylactic vaccine for Ebola in Sierra Leone, 2017, 15, 1551-0018, 337, 10.3934/mbe.2018015
    15. J.R. Artalejo, M.J. Lopez-Herrero, The SIS and SIR stochastic epidemic models: A maximum entropy approach, 2011, 80, 00405809, 256, 10.1016/j.tpb.2011.09.005
    16. Mudassar Imran, Tufail Malik, Ali R Ansari, Adnan Khan, Mathematical analysis of swine influenza epidemic model with optimal control, 2016, 33, 0916-7005, 269, 10.1007/s13160-016-0210-3
    17. Rahil Sachak-Patwa, Nabil T. Fadai, Robert A. Van Gorder, Modeling multi-group dynamics of related viral videos with delay differential equations, 2019, 521, 03784371, 197, 10.1016/j.physa.2019.01.052
    18. Vanja Dukic, Hedibert F. Lopes, Nicholas G. Polson, Tracking Epidemics With Google Flu Trends Data and a State-Space SEIR Model, 2012, 107, 0162-1459, 1410, 10.1080/01621459.2012.713876
    19. Paul J. Hurtado, Spencer R. Hall, Stephen P. Ellner, Infectious disease in consumer populations: dynamic consequences of resource-mediated transmission and infectiousness, 2014, 7, 1874-1738, 163, 10.1007/s12080-013-0208-2
    20. Rutao Luo, E. Fabian Cardozo, Michael J. Piovoso, Hulin Wu, Maria J. Buzon, Javier Martinez-Picado, Ryan Zurakowski, Modelling HIV-1 2-LTR dynamics following raltegravir intensification, 2013, 10, 1742-5689, 20130186, 10.1098/rsif.2013.0186
    21. Modeling COVID-19 scenarios for the United States, 2021, 27, 1078-8956, 94, 10.1038/s41591-020-1132-9
    22. K. Glass, G. N. Mercer, H. Nishiura, E. S. McBryde, N. G. Becker, Estimating reproduction numbers for adults and children from case data, 2011, 8, 1742-5689, 1248, 10.1098/rsif.2010.0679
    23. Adnan Khan, Muhammad Waleed, Mudassar Imran, Mathematical analysis of an influenza epidemic model, formulation of different controlling strategies using optimal control and estimation of basic reproduction number, 2015, 21, 1387-3954, 432, 10.1080/13873954.2015.1016975
    24. A. Calonnec, J-B. Burie, M. Langlais, S. Guyader, S. Saint-Jean, I. Sache, B. Tivoli, Impacts of plant growth and architecture on pathogen processes and their consequences for epidemic behaviour, 2013, 135, 0929-1873, 479, 10.1007/s10658-012-0111-5
    25. Yun Kang, Carlos Castillo-Chávez, A simple epidemiological model for populations in the wild with Allee effects and disease-modified fitness, 2014, 19, 1553-524X, 89, 10.3934/dcdsb.2014.19.89
    26. Mohsin Ali, Syed Touqeer H. Shah, Mudassar Imran, Adnan Khan, The role of asymptomatic class, quarantine and isolation in the transmission of COVID-19, 2020, 14, 1751-3758, 389, 10.1080/17513758.2020.1773000
    27. Parameter estimation and uncertainty quantification for an epidemic model, 2012, 9, 1551-0018, 553, 10.3934/mbe.2012.9.553
    28. Yves Emvudu, Danhrée Bongor, Rodoumta Koïna, Mathematical analysis of HIV/AIDS stochastic dynamic models, 2016, 40, 0307904X, 9131, 10.1016/j.apm.2016.05.007
    29. George Qian, Adam Mahdi, Sensitivity analysis methods in the biomedical sciences, 2020, 323, 00255564, 108306, 10.1016/j.mbs.2020.108306
    30. I. Takaidza, O. D. Makinde, O. K. Okosun, Computational Modelling and Optimal Control of Ebola Virus Disease with non-Linear Incidence Rate, 2017, 818, 1742-6588, 012003, 10.1088/1742-6596/818/1/012003
    31. Jing Li, Daniel Blakeley, Robert J. Smith, The Failure ofR0, 2011, 2011, 1748-670X, 1, 10.1155/2011/527610
    32. Carlos Castillo-Chavez, Sunmi Lee, 2015, Chapter 85, 978-3-540-70528-4, 427, 10.1007/978-3-540-70529-1_85
    33. Rahil Sachak-Patwa, Nabil T. Fadai, Robert A. Van Gorder, Understanding viral video dynamics through an epidemic modelling approach, 2018, 502, 03784371, 416, 10.1016/j.physa.2018.02.083
    34. Matthew Biggerstaff, Simon Cauchemez, Carrie Reed, Manoj Gambhir, Lyn Finelli, Estimates of the reproduction number for seasonal, pandemic, and zoonotic influenza: a systematic review of the literature, 2014, 14, 1471-2334, 10.1186/1471-2334-14-480
    35. H. T. Banks, Ariel Cintrón-Arias, Franz Kappel, 2013, Chapter 3, 978-3-642-32881-7, 43, 10.1007/978-3-642-32882-4_3
    36. Cameron Browne, Hayriye Gulbudak, Glenn Webb, Modeling contact tracing in outbreaks with application to Ebola, 2015, 384, 00225193, 33, 10.1016/j.jtbi.2015.08.004
    37. Samira Akbari, Naveen K. Vaidya, Lindi M. Wahl, The Time Distribution of Sulfadoxine-Pyrimethamine Protection from Malaria, 2012, 0092-8240, 10.1007/s11538-012-9775-4
    38. Baojun Song, Zhilan Feng, Gerardo Chowell, From the guest editors, 2013, 10, 1551-0018, 10.3934/mbe.2013.10.5i
    39. Lu Tang, Yiwang Zhou, Lili Wang, Soumik Purkayastha, Leyao Zhang, Jie He, Fei Wang, Peter X.‐K. Song, A Review of Multi‐Compartment Infectious Disease Models, 2020, 88, 0306-7734, 462, 10.1111/insr.12402
    40. A. Cintrón-Arias, H. T. Banks, A. Capaldi, A. L. Lloyd, A sensitivity matrix based methodology for inverse problem formulation, 2009, 17, 0928-0219, 10.1515/JIIP.2009.034
    41. Asier Ibeas, Manuel De La Sen, Santiago Alonso-Quesada, Raul Nistal, 2018, Parameter Estimation of Multi-Staged SI(n)RS Epidemic Models, 978-1-5386-2864-5, 456, 10.1109/CONTROL.2018.8516767
    42. Elissa J. Schwartz, Boseung Choi, Grzegorz A. Rempala, Estimating epidemic parameters: Application to H1N1 pandemic data, 2015, 270, 00255564, 198, 10.1016/j.mbs.2015.03.007
    43. Manoj Gambhir, Catherine Bozio, Justin J. O'Hagan, Amra Uzicanin, Lucinda E. Johnson, Matthew Biggerstaff, David L. Swerdlow, Infectious Disease Modeling Methods as Tools for Informing Response to Novel Influenza Viruses of Unknown Pandemic Potential, 2015, 60, 1537-6591, S11, 10.1093/cid/civ083
    44. Zain Ul Abadin Zafar, Kashif Rehan, M Mushtaq, RETRACTED ARTICLE: Fractional-order scheme for bovine babesiosis disease and tick populations, 2017, 2017, 1687-1847, 10.1186/s13662-017-1133-2
    45. Saraya Tavornpanich, Hildegunn Viljugrein, Anne Stene, Edgar Brun, Estimation of the reproduction number of salmon pancreas disease virus subtype 3 in homogeneously mixed populations of Norwegian farmed Atlantic salmon, 2013, 111, 01675877, 329, 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2013.05.012
    46. Junjing Lin, Michael Ludkovski, Sequential Bayesian inference in hidden Markov stochastic kinetic models with application to detection and response to seasonal epidemics, 2014, 24, 0960-3174, 1047, 10.1007/s11222-013-9419-z
    47. Erida Gjini, M. Gabriela M. Gomes, Expanding vaccine efficacy estimation with dynamic models fitted to cross-sectional prevalence data post-licensure, 2016, 14, 17554365, 71, 10.1016/j.epidem.2015.11.001
    48. Marco Tulio Angulo, Jorge X. Velasco-Hernandez, Robust qualitative estimation of time-varying contact rates in uncertain epidemics, 2018, 24, 17554365, 98, 10.1016/j.epidem.2018.03.001
    49. Rahil Sachak-Patwa, Helen M. Byrne, Robin N. Thompson, Accounting for cross-immunity can improve forecast accuracy during influenza epidemics, 2021, 34, 17554365, 100432, 10.1016/j.epidem.2020.100432
    50. M. Ventresca, A. Szatan, B. Say, D. Aleman, 2015, Chapter 19, 978-3-319-18566-8, 359, 10.1007/978-3-319-18567-5_19
    51. Xian Yang, Shuo Wang, Yuting Xing, Ling Li, Richard Yi Da Xu, Karl J. Friston, Yike Guo, Alison L. Hill, Bayesian data assimilation for estimating instantaneous reproduction numbers during epidemics: Applications to COVID-19, 2022, 18, 1553-7358, e1009807, 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009807
    52. Tao Cheng, Xinchen Zhong, Yunzhe Liu, Yang Zhang, Guangsheng Dong, 2021, Chapter 12, 978-3-030-72807-6, 233, 10.1007/978-3-030-72808-3_12
    53. Marcos A. Capistrán, Antonio Capella, J. Andrés Christen, Filtering and improved Uncertainty Quantification in the dynamic estimation of effective reproduction numbers, 2022, 40, 17554365, 100624, 10.1016/j.epidem.2022.100624
    54. Caifen Liu, Lingfeng Xu, Yuan Bai, Xiaoke Xu, Eric H. Y. Lau, Benjamin J. Cowling, Zhanwei Du, Local Surveillance of the COVID-19 Outbreak, 2022, 10, 2296-424X, 10.3389/fphy.2022.824369
    55. Isaac N. Schrarstzhaupt, Mellanie Fontes-Dutra, Fredi Alexander Diaz-Quijano, Early estimates of the incidence trend and the reproductive number of the monkeypox epidemic in Brazil, 2022, 50, 14778939, 102484, 10.1016/j.tmaid.2022.102484
    56. Adnan Khan, Mahim Naveed, Muhammad Dur-e-Ahmad, Mudassar Imran, Estimating the basic reproductive ratio for the Ebola outbreak in Liberia and Sierra Leone, 2015, 4, 2049-9957, 10.1186/s40249-015-0043-3
    57. Akira Ohsumi, Estimation of Epidemiological Parameters of the SIR Model, 2022, 2022, 2188-4730, 36, 10.5687/sss.2022.36
    58. Ryan M Barber, Reed J D Sorensen, David M Pigott, Catherine Bisignano, Austin Carter, Joanne O Amlag, James K Collins, Cristiana Abbafati, Christopher Adolph, Adrien Allorant, Aleksandr Y Aravkin, Bree L Bang-Jensen, Emma Castro, Suman Chakrabarti, Rebecca M Cogen, Emily Combs, Haley Comfort, Kimberly Cooperrider, Xiaochen Dai, Farah Daoud, Amanda Deen, Lucas Earl, Megan Erickson, Samuel B Ewald, Alize J Ferrari, Abraham D Flaxman, Joseph Jon Frostad, Nancy Fullman, John R Giles, Gaorui Guo, Jiawei He, Monika Helak, Erin N Hulland, Bethany M Huntley, Alice Lazzar-Atwood, Kate E LeGrand, Stephen S Lim, Akiaja Lindstrom, Emily Linebarger, Rafael Lozano, Beatrice Magistro, Deborah Carvalho Malta, Johan Månsson, Ana M Mantilla Herrera, Ali H Mokdad, Lorenzo Monasta, Mohsen Naghavi, Shuhei Nomura, Christopher M Odell, Latera Tesfaye Olana, Samuel M Ostroff, Maja Pasovic, Spencer A Pease, Robert C Reiner Jr, Grace Reinke, Antonio Luiz P Ribeiro, Damian F Santomauro, Aleksei Sholokhov, Emma E Spurlock, Ruri Syailendrawati, Roman Topor-Madry, Anh Truc Vo, Theo Vos, Rebecca Walcott, Ally Walker, Kirsten E Wiens, Charles Shey Wiysonge, Nahom Alemseged Worku, Peng Zheng, Simon I Hay, Emmanuela Gakidou, Christopher J L Murray, Estimating global, regional, and national daily and cumulative infections with SARS-CoV-2 through Nov 14, 2021: a statistical analysis, 2022, 399, 01406736, 2351, 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00484-6
    59. Adnan Khan, Muhammad Hassan, Mudassar Imran, Estimating the basic reproduction number for single-strain dengue fever epidemics, 2014, 3, 2049-9957, 10.1186/2049-9957-3-12
    60. Serge M. A. Somda, Boukary Ouedraogo, Constant B. Pare, Seni Kouanda, Khalid Hattaf, Estimation of the Serial Interval and the Effective Reproductive Number of COVID-19 Outbreak Using Contact Data in Burkina Faso, a Sub-Saharan African Country, 2022, 2022, 1748-6718, 1, 10.1155/2022/8239915
    61. Orwa Al-Abdulla, Agneta Kallström, Camilo Valderrama, Jussi Kauhanen, Simulation of the Progression of the COVID-19 Outbreak in Northwest Syria Using a Basic and Adjusted SIR Model, 2022, 2, 2813-0227, 44, 10.3390/zoonoticdis2020006
    62. Danton Freire-Flores, Nyna Llanovarced-Kawles, Anamaria Sanchez-Daza, Álvaro Olivera-Nappa, On the heterogeneous spread of COVID-19 in Chile, 2021, 150, 09600779, 111156, 10.1016/j.chaos.2021.111156
    63. Z. Rapti, J. Cuevas-Maraver, E. Kontou, S. Liu, Y. Drossinos, P. G. Kevrekidis, M. Barmann, Q.-Y. Chen, G. A. Kevrekidis, The Role of Mobility in the Dynamics of the COVID-19 Epidemic in Andalusia, 2023, 85, 0092-8240, 10.1007/s11538-023-01152-5
    64. Juan Li, Wendi Bao, Xianghong Zhang, Yongzhong Song, Zhigui Lin, Huaiping Zhu, Modelling the transmission and control of COVID-19 in Yangzhou city with the implementation of Zero-COVID policy, 2023, 20, 1551-0018, 15781, 10.3934/mbe.2023703
    65. Christophe Bonaldi, Anne Fouillet, Cécile Sommen, Daniel Lévy-Bruhl, Juliette Paireau, Kaspar Staub, Monitoring the reproductive number of COVID-19 in France: Comparative estimates from three datasets, 2023, 18, 1932-6203, e0293585, 10.1371/journal.pone.0293585
    66. D. Bichara, A. Iggidr, M. Oumoun, A. Rapaport, G. Sallet, Identifiability and Observability via decoupled variables: Application to a malaria intra-host model, 2023, 56, 24058963, 576, 10.1016/j.ifacol.2023.10.1629
    67. Yasmany Fernandez-Fernandez, Sira M. Allende-Alonso, Ridelio Miranda-Perez, Gemayqzel Bouza-Allende, Elia N. Cabrera-Alvarez, 2022, A Predictive Model for R0 (SARS-COV2), 978-1-6654-9106-8, 1, 10.1109/ICEET56468.2022.10007418
    68. Yifei Li, Li Shao, Using an epidemiological model to explore the interplay between sharing and advertising in viral videos, 2024, 14, 2045-2322, 10.1038/s41598-024-61814-9
    69. Peng Li, Lihai Wen, Baijun Sun, Wei Sun, Huijie Chen, Retrospective estimation of the time-varying effective reproduction number for a COVID-19 outbreak in Shenyang, China: An observational study, 2024, 103, 0025-7974, e38373, 10.1097/MD.0000000000038373
    70. Nik Cunniffe, Frédéric Hamelin, Abderrahman Iggidr, Alain Rapaport, Gauthier Sallet, 2024, Chapter 5, 978-981-97-2538-0, 59, 10.1007/978-981-97-2539-7_5
    71. Katelyn Plaisier Leisman, Shinhae Park, Sarah Simpson, Zoi Rapti, A simple model for the analysis of epidemics based on hospitalization data, 2025, 381, 00255564, 109380, 10.1016/j.mbs.2025.109380
    72. Osman Rasit Isik, Necibe Tuncer, Maia Martcheva, A mathematical model for the role of vaccination and treatment in measles transmission in Turkey, 2025, 457, 03770427, 116308, 10.1016/j.cam.2024.116308
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(2281) PDF downloads(207) Cited by(3)

Figures and Tables

Figures(4)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog