
Citation: Essam R. El-Zahar. Approximate analytical solution of singularly perturbed boundary value problems in MAPLE[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(3): 2272-2284. doi: 10.3934/math.2020150
[1] | Zhongdi Cen, Jian Huang, Aimin Xu . A posteriori mesh method for a system of singularly perturbed initial value problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16719-16732. doi: 10.3934/math.2022917 |
[2] | T. Prathap, R. Nageshwar Rao . Fitted mesh methods based on non-polynomial splines for singularly perturbed boundary value problems with mixed shifts. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 26403-26434. doi: 10.3934/math.20241285 |
[3] | Şuayip Toprakseven, Seza Dinibutun . Error estimations of a weak Galerkin finite element method for a linear system of $ \ell\geq 2 $ coupled singularly perturbed reaction-diffusion equations in the energy and balanced norms. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 15427-15465. doi: 10.3934/math.2023788 |
[4] | Yige Zhao, Yibing Sun, Zhi Liu, Yilin Wang . Solvability for boundary value problems of nonlinear fractional differential equations with mixed perturbations of the second type. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(1): 557-567. doi: 10.3934/math.2020037 |
[5] | Qura Tul Ain, Muhammad Nadeem, Shazia Karim, Ali Akgül, Fahd Jarad . Optimal variational iteration method for parametric boundary value problem. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16649-16656. doi: 10.3934/math.2022912 |
[6] | Ram Shiromani, Carmelo Clavero . An efficient numerical method for 2D elliptic singularly perturbed systems with different magnitude parameters in the diffusion and the convection terms, part Ⅱ. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 35570-35598. doi: 10.3934/math.20241688 |
[7] | Khudija Bibi . Solutions of initial and boundary value problems using invariant curves. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 22057-22066. doi: 10.3934/math.20241072 |
[8] | M. Chandru, T. Prabha, V. Shanthi, H. Ramos . An almost second order uniformly convergent method for a two-parameter singularly perturbed problem with a discontinuous convection coefficient and source term. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 24998-25027. doi: 10.3934/math.20241219 |
[9] | Murat A. Sultanov, Vladimir E. Misilov, Makhmud A. Sadybekov . Numerical method for solving the subdiffusion differential equation with nonlocal boundary conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 36385-36404. doi: 10.3934/math.20241726 |
[10] | V. Raja, E. Sekar, S. Shanmuga Priya, B. Unyong . Fitted mesh method for singularly perturbed fourth order differential equation of convection diffusion type with integral boundary condition. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 16691-16707. doi: 10.3934/math.2023853 |
Singularly perturbed boundary value problems (SPBVPs), also known as stiff, are not easily treated analytically or numerically [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20] and so that having a simple program to obtain analytical and numerical solutions of these problems would be interesting and helpful. The most common analytical method to study SPBVPs is the method of matched asymptotic expansions which involves finding outer and inner solutions of the problem and their matching [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]. Recently, Wang [9] present a Maple program and its corresponding algorithm to obtain a rational approximate solution for a class of nonlinear SPBVPs. Such an algorithm is based on the boundary value method presented by Wang [8] and using Taylor series and Pade expansion to approximate the boundary condition at infinity. In fact, the accuracy of the obtained boundary layer solution in [8,9] depends upon how far the Pade expansion approximates the solution, which consequently depends upon the radius of convergence and how many terms considered in the expansion [21]. Therefore, to get accurate results over the boundary layer region, more higher-order terms may be needed [10]. Moreover, the technique of using Taylor series and Pade expansion for solving boundary layer problems with a boundary condition at infinity often results in nonlinear algebraic equations and hence multiple solutions appear which leads to unsatisfied results. To overcome these drawbacks, we have established a new and simple Maple program spivp, based on a new initial value method [11], to obtain approximate analytical and numerical solutions of SPBVPs. The algorithm is designed for practicing engineers or applied mathematicians who need a practical tool for solving these problems. Some examples are solved to illustrate the implementation of the program and the accuracy of the algorithm. Analytical and numerical results are compared with results in literature. The results confirm that the present method is accurate and offers a simple and easy practical tool for obtaining approximate analytical and numerical solutions of SPBVPs.
Let us first recall the basic principles of the boundary value method presented in [8].
Consider the nonlinear SPBVP of the form
εd2ydx2+p(x,y)dydx+q(x,y)=0,x∈[0,1], | (2.1) |
with conditions
y(0)=α,y(1)=β, | (2.2) |
where 0<ε≪1, α and β are given constants, p(x,y) and q(x,y) are assumed to be sufficiently continuously differentiable functions on [0,1], and p(x,y)≥M>0 for every x∈[0,1], where M is a positive constant. Under these assumptions, the SPBVP (2.1-2.2) has a unique solution y(x) which in general displays a boundary layer at x=0 for small values of ε.
Theorem 1. The solution y(x) of the nonlinear SPBVP (2.1-2.2) can be expressed as:
y(x)=u(x)+v(t)+O(ε),t=xε, |
where u(x) and v(t) are the solutions of the following IVP and BVP given respectively by:
{p(x,u)dudx+q(x,u)=0,u(1)=β, | (2.3) |
and
{d2vdt2+p(0,u(0)+v(t))dvdt=0,v(0)=α−u(0),limt→+∞v(t)=0. | (2.4) |
Proof. See Ref. [8].
In fact, v(t) cannot be always solved from Eq. (2.4) and so that one can assume that v′(0)=δ and use Taylor series and Pade expansion to determine the value of δ using the condition at infinity and obtain an approximate rational solution for Eq. (2.4) [8,9].
In this section, an initial value method is established from the boundary value method in Theorem1 for solving SPBVP (2.1-2.2).
Theorem 2. The solution y(x) of the nonlinear SPBVP (2.1-2.2) can be expressed as:
y(x)=u(x)+v(t)+O(ε),t=xε, | (3.1) |
where u(x) and v(t) are the solutions of the following IVPs:
{p(x,u)dudx+q(x,u)=0,u(1)=β, | (3.2) |
and
{dvdt+f(0,u(0)+v(t))=f(0,u(0))v(0)=α−u(0). | (3.3) |
where
f(0,u(0)+v(t))=∫p(0,u(0)+v(t))dv |
Proof. Integrating Eq. (2.4) results in
∫∞td2vds2ds+∫∞t(p(0,u(0)+v(s))dvds)ds=0, | (3.4) |
[dvds+f(0,u(0)+v(s))]s→+∞s=t=0, | (3.5) |
where f(0,u(0)+v(s))=∫p(0,u(0)+v(s))dv.
Thus we have
dvdt+f(0,u(0)+v(t))=lims→+∞dvds+f(0,u(0)+lims→+∞v(s)), | (3.6) |
which results in a first order initial value problem given by
dvdt+f(0,u(0)+v(t))=f(0,u(0)), | (3.7) |
with the initial condition
v(0)=α−u(0). |
Thus, we have replaced the second order BVP (2.4) by the approximate first order IVP (3.7). Obviously Theorem 2 agrees with the theoretical results in [11].
Remark. The value of δ used in the boundary value method [8,9] is easily obtained from Eq. (3.3) as δ=f(0,u(0))−f(0,α)
Using the initial value method presented in Theorem 2 for linear problems results in some useful theoretical results.
Let's consider the linear SPBVP
εd2ydx2+p(x)dydx+q(x)y=0,x∈[0,1], | (3.8) |
with conditions
y(0)=α,y(1)=β, | (3.9) |
where 0<ε≪1, α and β are given constants, p(x) and q(x) are assumed to be sufficiently continuously differentiable functions on [0,1], and p(x)≥M>0 for every x∈[0,1], where M is a positive constant. The assumption merely implies that the boundary layer will be in the neighborhood of x=0.
Theorem 3. The solution of the linear SPBVP (3.8-3.9) can be approximated by:
y(x)=βe∫x1−q(x)p(x)ds+((α−u(0))e−p(0)xε)+O(ε) | (3.10) |
Proof. According to the initial value method presented in Theorem 2, we have
y(x)=u(x)+v(t)+O(ε),t=xε, | (3.11) |
where u(x) and v(t) are the solutions of the following IVPs:
{p(x)dudx+q(x)u=0,u(1)=β, | (3.12) |
and
{dvdt+p(0)v(t)=0v(0)=α−u(0). | (3.13) |
The reduced problem (3.12) and the boundary layer corrected problem (3.13) are easily solvable since they are separable and thus (3.11) results in the asymptotic analytical solution given by
y(x)=βe∫x1−q(x)p(x)ds+((α−u(0))e−p(0)xε)+O(ε), |
which is the well known asymptotic solution given in [2,11].
Obviously, the value of δ used in the boundary value method in Theorem 1 can be obtained directly from (3.13) as δ=v′(0)=−p(0)(α−u(0)) which agrees with the theoretical results in [8,9].
Mathematical mechanization is one of the important methods of mathematical studies [9,12,13,22,23,24,25,26]. In Maple, obtaining analytical solution of the nonlinear SPBVP (2.1-2.2) through solving the IVPs (3.2) and (3.3) can be well established a very simple symbolic program that can easily calculate the approximate analytical and numerical solutions. Now if we want to solve SPBVP (2.1-2.2) using the initial value method in Theorem 2, everything we have to do is just to input information about the SPBVP, and the program will give out the solution. The program spivp is as follows:
spivp : = proc (p, q, alpha, beta)
local p0, q0, pu, qu, f, us, k, vs, sol, vx, iniu, iniv;
p0 : = unapply(p, x, y);
q0 : = unapply(q, x, y);
pu : = p0(x, u(x));
qu : = q0(x, u(x));
f : = unapply(int(p, y), x, y);
iniu : = u(1) = beta;
us : = rhs(dsolve(pu*(diff(u(x), x))+qu = 0, iniu, u(x))); k : = eval(us, x = 0);
iniv : = v(0) = alpha-k;
vs : = rhs(dsolve(diff(v(t), t)+f(0, v(t)+k) = f(0, k), iniv, v(t)));
vx : = subs(t = x/ϵ, vs);
sol : = simplify(us+vx, size)
end proc
For convenience, in the program spivp, we always let x represents the independent variable, and set the parameters as following:
p: the coefficient, p(x,y), in the equation which to be solved.
q: the coefficient, q(x,y), in the equation which to be solved.
α,β : the boundary values.
For example, if we consider the SPBVP:
εd2ydx2+eydydx−π2sin(πx2)e2y=0,y(0)=0,y(1)=0. |
One just input the following command
spivp(exp(y),−pi/2.sin(pi.x/2).exp(2.y),0,0);
In this section, four examples are solved to illustrate the implementation and the accuracy of the method.
Example 1. Consider the nonlinear SPBVP from Bender and Orszag [6]
εd2ydx2+2dydx+ey=0,y(0)=y(1)=0. | (5.1) |
To solve this problem, we input the following command:
spivp(2,exp(y),0,0)
The output is:
y(x)−ln(12x+12)−ln(2)e−2xε |
which is the uniform valid approximate solution given by Bender and Orszag [6]. The solution of Example 1 at different values of ε is presented in Figure 1.
Example 2. Consider the nonlinear SPBVP from O'Malley [2]
εd2ydx2+eydydx−π2sin(πx2)e2y=0,y(0)=y(1)=0. | (5.2) |
Input the following command in Maple
spivp(exp(y),−Pi/2.sin(Pi.x/2).exp(2.y),0,0);
The output is
y(x)=−ln(cos(12πx)+1)+ln(−2e−12xε−2), |
which is the uniform valid approximate solution given by O'Malley [2]. The solution of Example 2 at different values of ε is presented in Figure 2.
As shown from the previous two examples, the present algorithm offers a simple and easy tool for obtaining asymptotic analytical and approximate numerical solutions for SPBVPs.
Example 3. Consider the nonlinear SPBVP from Kevorkian and Cole [7]
εd2ydx2+ydydx−y=0,y(0)=−1,y(1)=3.9995 | (5.3) |
For comparison purpose, we write the uniform approximation provided by Kevorkian and Cole [7] as
y(x)=x+c1tanh[c1(x/ε+c2)/2], | (5.4) |
where c1=2.9995 and c2=1/c1ln[(c1−1)/(c1+1)].
For this problem, Wang [9] has obtained a solution given by:
y(x)=x+2.9995+L(t)Q(t), | (5.5) |
where t=x/ε, and
L(t)=−3.9995+(1.99975+δ)t−0.39995(1+2δ)t2+[0.0333292(1+2δ)−0.25δ+0.1δ(1+2δ)+0.166667(δ−δ2)]t3,Q(t)=1−0.5δ+0.1(1+2δ)t2−0.0083333(1+2δ)t3,}, | (5.6) |
where δ=−1.999791999.
Here we apply the present method by inputting the following command in Maple
spivp(y,−y,−1,3.9995);
The output is
y(x)=x+59992000−479860011000(7999+3999e59992000xε). | (5.7) |
In Figure 3, the present solution (5.7) and the obtained solutions by Wang [9], Eqs. (5.5-5.6) are compared with the uniform approximate solution in [7] at ε=0.001. As shown from Figure 3 the solution (5.5-5.6), solid red line, deviates much from our solution (5.7), dashed blue line, and the uniform approximate solution, dotted blue line, in [7]. In fact, applying the conditionlimt→+∞v(t)=0 to (5.6) results in two different values for δ (δ=−1.999791999, δ=−0.5) and each one of them leads to unsatisfied results. The numerical results of Example 3 are compared with the results in literature in Table 1. Moreover, the results for different values of ε are presented in Table 2.
x | Present | Results in[16] | Results in[17] | Results in[7] |
0.00 | -1.000000 | -1.000000 | -1.000000 | -1.0000000 |
0.5ε | 1.1484593 | 2.1363630 | 1.1484592 | 1.1484592 |
1.0ε | 2.4569397 | 2.8140590 | 2.4569396 | 2.4569396 |
0.1 | 3.0994999 | 3.0995020 | 3.0962686 | 3.0994999 |
0.2 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995020 | 3.1963699 | 3.1995000 |
0.3 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995020 | 3.2964650 | 3.2995000 |
0.4 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995010 | 3.3965544 | 3.3995000 |
0.5 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995010 | 3.4466386 | 3.4995000 |
0.6 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 | 3.5967184 | 3.5995000 |
0.7 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 | 3.6967939 | 3.6995000 |
0.8 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 | 3.7968656 | 3.7995000 |
0.9 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 | 3.8969335 | 3.8995000 |
1.0 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 | 3.9969980 | 3.9995000 |
x | ε=10−2 | ε=10−4 | ε=10−5 | ε=10−6 |
0.00 | -1.0000000 | -1.0000000 | -1.0000000 | -1.0000000 |
0.5ε | 1.1529593 | 1.1480093 | 1.1479643 | 1.1479598 |
1.0ε | 2.4659397 | 2.4560397 | 2.4559497 | 2.4559407 |
0.1 | 3.0995000 | 3.0995000 | 3.0995000 | 3.0995000 |
0.2 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995000 |
0.3 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995000 |
0.4 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995000 |
0.5 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995000 |
0.6 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 |
0.7 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 |
0.8 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 |
0.9 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 |
1.0 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 |
Example 4. Finally, we consider the following linear SPBVP from Bender and Orszag [6]
εd2ydx2+dydx−y=0,y(0)=y(1)=1. | (5.8) |
For this problem, Wang [9] has obtained the following rational solution:
y(x)=exe+L(x)Q(x), | (5.9) |
where
L(x)=ε(−19115.326ε4+200691.9566x4−19115.32x3ε+8427734.7x2ε2−1070458.24xε3), |
and
Q(x)=−30240ε5+196560xε4+102480x2ε3+22260x3ε2+2490x4ε+125x5. |
Using the following command :
spivp(1,−y,1,1),
the obtained solution is
y(x)=ex−1+(e−1)e−x/ε−1. | (5.10) |
The numerical results of Example 4 are shown in Tables 3, 4 and Figure 4.
x | Present | Results in[6] | Results in[9] | Results in[17] | Exact solution |
0.00 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 |
0.01 | 0.3716054 | 0.3716050 | 39.621608 | 0.3712379 | 0.3719724 |
0.02 | 0.3753111 | 0.3753109 | 34.943933 | 0.3749439 | 0.3756784 |
0.03 | 0.3790831 | 0.3790832 | 29.856212 | 0.3787160 | 0.3794502 |
0.04 | 0.3828929 | 0.3828929 | 25.706355 | 0.3825260 | 0.3832599 |
0.05 | 0.3867410 | 0.3867409 | 22.458425 | 0.3863742 | 0.3871079 |
0.10 | 0.4065697 | 0.4065696 | 13.632736 | 0.4062043 | 0.4069350 |
0.30 | 0.4965853 | 0.4965853 | 5.5064473 | 0.4962382 | 0.4969324 |
0.50 | 0.6065307 | 0.6065305 | 3.6923714 | 0.6062278 | 0.6068334 |
0.70 | 0.7408182 | 0.7408182 | 2.9700713 | 0.7405963 | 0.7410401 |
0.90 | 0.9048374 | 0.9048373 | 2.6496651 | 0.9047471 | 0.9049277 |
1.00 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 2.5738182 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 |
x | ε=10−2 | ε=10−4 | ε=10−5 | ε=10−6 |
0.00 | 1.00000000 | 1.000000000 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 |
0.01 | 0.60412084 | 0.37157669 | 0.37157669 | 0.37157669 |
0.02 | 0.46085931 | 0.37531109 | 0.37531109 | 0.37531109 |
0.03 | 0.41055446 | 0.37908303 | 0.37908303 | 0.37908303 |
0.04 | 0.39447057 | 0.38289288 | 0.38289288 | 0.38289288 |
0.05 | 0.39100021 | 0.38674102 | 0.38674102 | 0.38674102 |
0.10 | 0.40659835 | 0.40656965 | 0.40656965 | 0.40656965 |
0.30 | 0.49658530 | 0.49658530 | 0.49658530 | 0.49658530 |
0.50 | 0.60653065 | 0.60653065 | 0.60653065 | 0.60653065 |
0.70 | 0.74081822 | 0.74081822 | 0.74081822 | 0.74081822 |
0.90 | 0.90483741 | 0.90483741 | 0.90483741 | 0.90483741 |
1.00 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 |
Obviously, the solution in (5.9) needs more higher-order terms in Pade's expansion to match the boundary layer behavior [10].
In this paper, we have presented approximate analytical and numerical solution of SPBVPs using a new and simple Maple program spivp. The method is based on an initial value method that replaces the original SPBVP by two asymptotically approximate IVPs. These IVPs are solved analytically and their solutions are combined to approximate the analytical solution of the original SPBVP. The method is very easy to implement on any computer with a minimum problem preparation. We have implemented it in Maple and applied it to four examples and compared the obtained results with the results in literature. The results indicate that the method is accurate and offers a simple and easy practical tool for the practicing engineers or applied mathematicians who need a practical tool for obtaining approximate analytical and numerical solution of SPBVPs.
The author would like to thank the referees for their valuable comments and suggestions which helped to improve the manuscript. Moreover, the author acknowledges that this publication was supported by the Deanship of Scientific Research at Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia.
The author declares no conflict of interest.
[1] | R. E. O'Malley, Singular perturbation methods for ordinary differential equations, New York: Springer, 1991. |
[2] | R. E. O'Malley, Introduction to Singular Perturbations, Academic Press, New York, 1974. |
[3] | E. P. Doolan, J. J. Miller and W. H. Schilders, Uniform numerical methods for problems with initial and boundary layers, Boole Press, 1980. |
[4] | H. G. Roos, M. Stynes and L. Tobiska, Numerical Methods for Singularly Perturbed Differential Equations, Springer, Berlin, 1980. |
[5] | J. J. Miller, E. O'Riordan and G. I. Shishkin, Fitted Numerical Methods for Singular Perturbation Problems, World Scientific, Singapore, 2012. |
[6] | C. M. Bender and S. A. Orszag, Advanced mathematical methods for scientists and engineers I, Springer Science & Business Media, 1999. |
[7] | J. Kevorkian and J. D. Cole, Perturbation methods in applied mathematics, Springer Science & Business Media, 2013. |
[8] | L. Wang, A novel method for a class of nonlinear singular perturbation problems, Appl. Math. Comput., 156 (2004), 847-856. |
[9] | W. Wang, An algorithm for solving nonlinear singular perturbation problems with mechanization, Appl. Math. Comput., 169 (2005), 995-1009. |
[10] | C. Liu, The Lie-group shooting method for singularly perturbed two-point boundary value problems, Computer Modeling in Engineering and Sciences, 15 (2006), 179-196. |
[11] |
E. R. El-Zahar, S. M. El-Kabeir, A new method for solving singularly perturbed boundary value problems, Appl. Math. Inform. Sci., 7 (2013), 927-938. doi: 10.12785/amis/070310
![]() |
[12] | Z. Li, W. Wang, Mechanization for solving SPP by reducing order method, Appl. Math. Comput., 169 (2005), 1028-1037. |
[13] | H. M. Habib, E. R. El-Zahar, An algorithm for solving singular perturbation problems with mechanization, Appl. Math. Comput., 188 (2007), 286-302. |
[14] |
A. Khan, P. Khandelwal, Non-polynomial sextic spline solution of singularly perturbed boundaryvalue problems, Int. J. Comput. Math., 91 (2014), 1122-1135. doi: 10.1080/00207160.2013.828865
![]() |
[15] |
M. K. Kadalbajoo, Y. N. Reddy, Initial-value technique for a class of nonlinear singular perturbation problems, J. Optimiz. Theory Appl., 53 (1987), 395-406. doi: 10.1007/BF00938946
![]() |
[16] | Y. N. Reddy, P. P. Chakravarthy, Numerical patching method for singularly perturbed two-point boundary value problems using cubic splines, Appl. Math. Comput., 149 (2004), 441-468. |
[17] | Y. N. Reddy, P. P. Chakravarthy, An initial-value approach for solving singularly perturbed twopoint boundary value problems, Appl. Math. Comput., 155 (2004), 95-110. |
[18] | M. Kumar, A recent development of computer methods for solving singularly perturbed boundary value problems, International Journal of Differential Equations, 2011 (2011), 1-32. |
[19] |
E. R. El-Zahar, Applications of Adaptive Multi step Differential Transform Method to Singular Perturbation Problems Arising in Science and Engineering, Appl. Math. Inform. Sci., 9 (2015), 223-232. doi: 10.12785/amis/090128
![]() |
[20] | E.R. El-Zahar, Piecewise approximate analytical solutions of high order singular perturbation problems with a discontinuous source term, International Journal of Differential Equations, 2016 (2016), 1-12. |
[21] | J. D. Faires, R. L. Burden, Numerical Analysis, Brooks/Cole, 2005. |
[22] | W. Chen, Z. Lu, An algorithm for Adomian decomposition method, Appl. Math. Comput., 159 (2004), 221-235. |
[23] | W. Wang, Y. Lin, Z. Zeng, A new mechanical algorithm for solving system of Fredholm integral equation using resolvent method, International Conference on Intelligent Computing, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008. |
[24] | W. Wang, A new mechanical algorithm for solving the second kind of Fredholm integral equation, Appl. Math. Comput., 172 (2006), 946-962. |
[25] |
V. R. Subramanian, R. E. White, Symbolic solutions for boundary value problems using Maple, Comput. Chem. Eng., 24 (2000), 2405-2416. doi: 10.1016/S0098-1354(00)00567-6
![]() |
[26] |
H. A. El-Arabawy, I. K. Youssef, A symbolic algorithm for solving linear two-point boundary value problems by modified Picard technique, Math. Comput. Model., 49 (2009), 344-351. doi: 10.1016/j.mcm.2008.07.030
![]() |
1. | Essam R. El-Zahar, A. M. Alotaibi, Abdelhalim Ebaid, Dumitru Baleanu, José Tenreiro Machado, Y. S. Hamed, Absolutely stable difference scheme for a general class of singular perturbation problems, 2020, 2020, 1687-1847, 10.1186/s13662-020-02862-z | |
2. | Mohammed Shqair, Essam R. El-Zahar, 2020, Chapter 6, 978-981-15-8497-8, 129, 10.1007/978-981-15-8498-5_6 | |
3. | Chein-Shan Liu, Chih-Wen Chang, Modified asymptotic solutions for second-order nonlinear singularly perturbed boundary value problems, 2022, 193, 03784754, 139, 10.1016/j.matcom.2021.10.005 | |
4. | Muhammad Ahsan, Martin Bohner, Aizaz Ullah, Amir Ali Khan, Sheraz Ahmad, A Haar wavelet multi-resolution collocation method for singularly perturbed differential equations with integral boundary conditions, 2023, 204, 03784754, 166, 10.1016/j.matcom.2022.08.004 | |
5. | Chein-Shan Liu, Essam R. El-Zahar, Chih-Wen Chang, Higher-Order Asymptotic Numerical Solutions for Singularly Perturbed Problems with Variable Coefficients, 2022, 10, 2227-7390, 2791, 10.3390/math10152791 | |
6. | Muhammet Enes Durmaz, Survey of the Layer Behaviour of the Singularly Perturbed Fredholm Integro-Differential Equation, 2024, 14, 2536-4618, 1301, 10.21597/jist.1483651 | |
7. | Esra Celik, Huseyin Tunc, Murat Sari, An efficient multi-derivative numerical method for chemical boundary value problems, 2024, 62, 0259-9791, 634, 10.1007/s10910-023-01556-7 |
x | Present | Results in[16] | Results in[17] | Results in[7] |
0.00 | -1.000000 | -1.000000 | -1.000000 | -1.0000000 |
0.5ε | 1.1484593 | 2.1363630 | 1.1484592 | 1.1484592 |
1.0ε | 2.4569397 | 2.8140590 | 2.4569396 | 2.4569396 |
0.1 | 3.0994999 | 3.0995020 | 3.0962686 | 3.0994999 |
0.2 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995020 | 3.1963699 | 3.1995000 |
0.3 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995020 | 3.2964650 | 3.2995000 |
0.4 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995010 | 3.3965544 | 3.3995000 |
0.5 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995010 | 3.4466386 | 3.4995000 |
0.6 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 | 3.5967184 | 3.5995000 |
0.7 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 | 3.6967939 | 3.6995000 |
0.8 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 | 3.7968656 | 3.7995000 |
0.9 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 | 3.8969335 | 3.8995000 |
1.0 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 | 3.9969980 | 3.9995000 |
x | ε=10−2 | ε=10−4 | ε=10−5 | ε=10−6 |
0.00 | -1.0000000 | -1.0000000 | -1.0000000 | -1.0000000 |
0.5ε | 1.1529593 | 1.1480093 | 1.1479643 | 1.1479598 |
1.0ε | 2.4659397 | 2.4560397 | 2.4559497 | 2.4559407 |
0.1 | 3.0995000 | 3.0995000 | 3.0995000 | 3.0995000 |
0.2 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995000 |
0.3 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995000 |
0.4 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995000 |
0.5 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995000 |
0.6 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 |
0.7 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 |
0.8 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 |
0.9 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 |
1.0 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 |
x | Present | Results in[6] | Results in[9] | Results in[17] | Exact solution |
0.00 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 |
0.01 | 0.3716054 | 0.3716050 | 39.621608 | 0.3712379 | 0.3719724 |
0.02 | 0.3753111 | 0.3753109 | 34.943933 | 0.3749439 | 0.3756784 |
0.03 | 0.3790831 | 0.3790832 | 29.856212 | 0.3787160 | 0.3794502 |
0.04 | 0.3828929 | 0.3828929 | 25.706355 | 0.3825260 | 0.3832599 |
0.05 | 0.3867410 | 0.3867409 | 22.458425 | 0.3863742 | 0.3871079 |
0.10 | 0.4065697 | 0.4065696 | 13.632736 | 0.4062043 | 0.4069350 |
0.30 | 0.4965853 | 0.4965853 | 5.5064473 | 0.4962382 | 0.4969324 |
0.50 | 0.6065307 | 0.6065305 | 3.6923714 | 0.6062278 | 0.6068334 |
0.70 | 0.7408182 | 0.7408182 | 2.9700713 | 0.7405963 | 0.7410401 |
0.90 | 0.9048374 | 0.9048373 | 2.6496651 | 0.9047471 | 0.9049277 |
1.00 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 2.5738182 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 |
x | ε=10−2 | ε=10−4 | ε=10−5 | ε=10−6 |
0.00 | 1.00000000 | 1.000000000 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 |
0.01 | 0.60412084 | 0.37157669 | 0.37157669 | 0.37157669 |
0.02 | 0.46085931 | 0.37531109 | 0.37531109 | 0.37531109 |
0.03 | 0.41055446 | 0.37908303 | 0.37908303 | 0.37908303 |
0.04 | 0.39447057 | 0.38289288 | 0.38289288 | 0.38289288 |
0.05 | 0.39100021 | 0.38674102 | 0.38674102 | 0.38674102 |
0.10 | 0.40659835 | 0.40656965 | 0.40656965 | 0.40656965 |
0.30 | 0.49658530 | 0.49658530 | 0.49658530 | 0.49658530 |
0.50 | 0.60653065 | 0.60653065 | 0.60653065 | 0.60653065 |
0.70 | 0.74081822 | 0.74081822 | 0.74081822 | 0.74081822 |
0.90 | 0.90483741 | 0.90483741 | 0.90483741 | 0.90483741 |
1.00 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 |
x | Present | Results in[16] | Results in[17] | Results in[7] |
0.00 | -1.000000 | -1.000000 | -1.000000 | -1.0000000 |
0.5ε | 1.1484593 | 2.1363630 | 1.1484592 | 1.1484592 |
1.0ε | 2.4569397 | 2.8140590 | 2.4569396 | 2.4569396 |
0.1 | 3.0994999 | 3.0995020 | 3.0962686 | 3.0994999 |
0.2 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995020 | 3.1963699 | 3.1995000 |
0.3 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995020 | 3.2964650 | 3.2995000 |
0.4 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995010 | 3.3965544 | 3.3995000 |
0.5 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995010 | 3.4466386 | 3.4995000 |
0.6 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 | 3.5967184 | 3.5995000 |
0.7 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 | 3.6967939 | 3.6995000 |
0.8 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 | 3.7968656 | 3.7995000 |
0.9 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 | 3.8969335 | 3.8995000 |
1.0 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 | 3.9969980 | 3.9995000 |
x | ε=10−2 | ε=10−4 | ε=10−5 | ε=10−6 |
0.00 | -1.0000000 | -1.0000000 | -1.0000000 | -1.0000000 |
0.5ε | 1.1529593 | 1.1480093 | 1.1479643 | 1.1479598 |
1.0ε | 2.4659397 | 2.4560397 | 2.4559497 | 2.4559407 |
0.1 | 3.0995000 | 3.0995000 | 3.0995000 | 3.0995000 |
0.2 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995000 | 3.1995000 |
0.3 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995000 | 3.2995000 |
0.4 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995000 | 3.3995000 |
0.5 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995000 | 3.4995000 |
0.6 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 | 3.5995000 |
0.7 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 | 3.6995000 |
0.8 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 | 3.7995000 |
0.9 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 | 3.8995000 |
1.0 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 | 3.9995000 |
x | Present | Results in[6] | Results in[9] | Results in[17] | Exact solution |
0.00 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 |
0.01 | 0.3716054 | 0.3716050 | 39.621608 | 0.3712379 | 0.3719724 |
0.02 | 0.3753111 | 0.3753109 | 34.943933 | 0.3749439 | 0.3756784 |
0.03 | 0.3790831 | 0.3790832 | 29.856212 | 0.3787160 | 0.3794502 |
0.04 | 0.3828929 | 0.3828929 | 25.706355 | 0.3825260 | 0.3832599 |
0.05 | 0.3867410 | 0.3867409 | 22.458425 | 0.3863742 | 0.3871079 |
0.10 | 0.4065697 | 0.4065696 | 13.632736 | 0.4062043 | 0.4069350 |
0.30 | 0.4965853 | 0.4965853 | 5.5064473 | 0.4962382 | 0.4969324 |
0.50 | 0.6065307 | 0.6065305 | 3.6923714 | 0.6062278 | 0.6068334 |
0.70 | 0.7408182 | 0.7408182 | 2.9700713 | 0.7405963 | 0.7410401 |
0.90 | 0.9048374 | 0.9048373 | 2.6496651 | 0.9047471 | 0.9049277 |
1.00 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 | 2.5738182 | 1.0000000 | 1.0000000 |
x | ε=10−2 | ε=10−4 | ε=10−5 | ε=10−6 |
0.00 | 1.00000000 | 1.000000000 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 |
0.01 | 0.60412084 | 0.37157669 | 0.37157669 | 0.37157669 |
0.02 | 0.46085931 | 0.37531109 | 0.37531109 | 0.37531109 |
0.03 | 0.41055446 | 0.37908303 | 0.37908303 | 0.37908303 |
0.04 | 0.39447057 | 0.38289288 | 0.38289288 | 0.38289288 |
0.05 | 0.39100021 | 0.38674102 | 0.38674102 | 0.38674102 |
0.10 | 0.40659835 | 0.40656965 | 0.40656965 | 0.40656965 |
0.30 | 0.49658530 | 0.49658530 | 0.49658530 | 0.49658530 |
0.50 | 0.60653065 | 0.60653065 | 0.60653065 | 0.60653065 |
0.70 | 0.74081822 | 0.74081822 | 0.74081822 | 0.74081822 |
0.90 | 0.90483741 | 0.90483741 | 0.90483741 | 0.90483741 |
1.00 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 | 1.00000000 |