
Improving the mathematics performance of school children is an objective for many policy-makers around the world. Student-centered interactive pedagogies like classroom discussions and other dialogic interaction practices have been considered the best practice to engage learners effectively in the learning process. However, dialogic teaching practices are least used in most Asian countries that on average achieve the highest mathematics scores in international assessments. Based on this conundrum, this paper utilized a large-scale education dataset for five Asian countries, namely the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) dataset for learner data from Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong, Korea, Malaysia, and Singapore to examine the relationship between dialogic classroom interaction teaching practices and the mathematics performance of 8th-grade learners. Using a within-learner-between-subject estimation strategy to account for endogeneity, we established that learners who are taught more frequently through dialogic interactive teaching practices in mathematics classes achieve higher mathematics scores. Our results confirm that interactive pedagogies do provide learning benefits, even in countries that use them sparingly. Thus, our findings challenge the held assumption that the efficacy of dialogic classroom interaction practices is context and learning culture specific. Nevertheless, our study also shows that the highly endogenous nature of the teaching and learning environment and learner performance limits the ability of any study that uses observational data to establish the true impact of dialogic practices on learner mathematics performance.
Citation: Volker Schöer, Jose G. Clavel. Dialogic teaching practices and student performance in mathematics in Asian countries[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 28671-28697. doi: 10.3934/math.20241391
[1] | Siqin Tang, Hong Li . A Legendre-tau-Galerkin method in time for two-dimensional Sobolev equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 16073-16093. doi: 10.3934/math.2023820 |
[2] | Jae-Myoung Kim . Time decay rates for the coupled modified Navier-Stokes and Maxwell equations on a half space. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(12): 13423-13431. doi: 10.3934/math.2021777 |
[3] | Xiaojun Zhou, Yue Dai . A spectral collocation method for the coupled system of nonlinear fractional differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 5670-5689. doi: 10.3934/math.2022314 |
[4] | Yuanqiang Chen, Jihui Zheng, Jing An . A Legendre spectral method based on a hybrid format and its error estimation for fourth-order eigenvalue problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 7570-7588. doi: 10.3934/math.2024367 |
[5] | A.S. Hendy, R.H. De Staelen, A.A. Aldraiweesh, M.A. Zaky . High order approximation scheme for a fractional order coupled system describing the dynamics of rotating two-component Bose-Einstein condensates. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 22766-22788. doi: 10.3934/math.20231160 |
[6] | Xingyang Ye, Chuanju Xu . A posteriori error estimates of spectral method for the fractional optimal control problems with non-homogeneous initial conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(11): 12028-12050. doi: 10.3934/math.2021697 |
[7] | Chuanhua Wu, Ziqiang Wang . The spectral collocation method for solving a fractional integro-differential equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(6): 9577-9587. doi: 10.3934/math.2022532 |
[8] | Ishtiaq Ali . Long time behavior of higher-order delay differential equation with vanishing proportional delay and its convergence analysis using spectral method. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 4946-4959. doi: 10.3934/math.2022275 |
[9] | Sharifah E. Alhazmi, M. A. Abdou, M. Basseem . Physical phenomena of spectral relationships via quadratic third kind mixed integral equation with discontinuous kernel. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 24379-24400. doi: 10.3934/math.20231243 |
[10] | Manal Alqhtani, Khaled M. Saad . Numerical solutions of space-fractional diffusion equations via the exponential decay kernel. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 6535-6549. doi: 10.3934/math.2022364 |
Improving the mathematics performance of school children is an objective for many policy-makers around the world. Student-centered interactive pedagogies like classroom discussions and other dialogic interaction practices have been considered the best practice to engage learners effectively in the learning process. However, dialogic teaching practices are least used in most Asian countries that on average achieve the highest mathematics scores in international assessments. Based on this conundrum, this paper utilized a large-scale education dataset for five Asian countries, namely the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) dataset for learner data from Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong, Korea, Malaysia, and Singapore to examine the relationship between dialogic classroom interaction teaching practices and the mathematics performance of 8th-grade learners. Using a within-learner-between-subject estimation strategy to account for endogeneity, we established that learners who are taught more frequently through dialogic interactive teaching practices in mathematics classes achieve higher mathematics scores. Our results confirm that interactive pedagogies do provide learning benefits, even in countries that use them sparingly. Thus, our findings challenge the held assumption that the efficacy of dialogic classroom interaction practices is context and learning culture specific. Nevertheless, our study also shows that the highly endogenous nature of the teaching and learning environment and learner performance limits the ability of any study that uses observational data to establish the true impact of dialogic practices on learner mathematics performance.
It is well known that the spectral method has high-order accuracy for smooth problems. The spectral method together with the difference method and the finite element method has become an important method for the numerical solution of partial differential equations (PDEs), and has been successfully applied to solve many practical problems. In recent years, with regard to the differential equations of time evolution, the high-order discrete scheme in time has received widespread attention and has become one of the hot spots in the field of numerical computing. The discontinuous Galerkin method in time is constantly developing, and a better higher-order discrete scheme in time is established [1,2,3]. The explicit, implicit and implicit-explicit Runge-Kutta methods have also made great progress: a local discontinuous Galerkin method with implicit-explicit time-marching is used to solve the multi-dimensional convection-diffusion problems and time-dependent incompressible fluid flow in [4,5,6]. In [7,8,9], the spectral method in time and the time multi-interval spectral method are also proposed. The single interval and multi-interval Legendre spectral methods in time are established for the parabolic equations, in which the L2-optimal error estimate in space is obtained in [10].
The Maxwell equation is a set of important PDEs that describes electromagnetic field phenomena, and some effective numerical methods have been established for the Maxwell equation by scholars [11,12,13]. The finite-difference time-domain method (also called Yee's scheme) for the Maxwell equation is proposed in [14]. In [15,16], an energy-conserved splitting spectral method for solving the Maxwell equation is given. For the 2-D Maxwell equation, a Legendre-Galerkin method in space and the energy-conserved splitting spectral method in time is constructed [17]. In previous work, the different method is used in the time direction. For the 1-D Maxwell equation of inhomogeneous media with discontinuous solutions, the multidomain Legendre-Galerkin and the multidomain Legendre-tau method are established in [18,19], and the optimal error estimates of the semi-discrete schemes are given.
Consider the following 1-D Maxwell equation [20]
{ϵ∂tEz=∂xHy,(x,t)∈Ω,μ∂tHy=∂xEz,(x,t)∈Ω,Ez(−1,t)=Ez(1,t)=0,t∈It,Ez(x,0)=Ez0(x),Hy(x,0)=Hy0(x),x∈Ix, | (1.1) |
where Ix=(−1,1), It=(0,T], and Ω=Ix×It. Ez and Hy stand for the electric field and the magnetic field, respectively. The positive constants ϵ and μ stand for the electric permeability and the magnetic permeability, respectively.
In [21,22], an h-p version of the Petrov-Galerkin time stepping method is used to solve the nonlinear initial value problems by transforming the second-order problem into a first-order system. For the linear second-order wave equation, it is often transformed into the first-order system similar to equation (1.1) by using the substitution v=∂u∂t,w=∂u∂x [23]. It is interesting to note that some methods use the derivative as the main unknown function, and u is expressed as the integral of w.
In this paper, a Legendre-tau space-time (LT-ST) spectral method is developed to solve the 1-D Maxwell equation (1.1) and a time multi-interval Legendre-tau spectral method is considered. The scheme is based on the Legendre-tau method, which uses polynomials of different degrees are used to approximate the electric field Ez and magnetic field Hy, respectively, so that they can be decoupled in computation. After decoupling, it is an equation only about Ez, which can be solved by the method in [10]. The method is also applied to the numerical solutions of the 1-D nonlinear Maxwell equation.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, a Legendre-tau space-time spectral method for (1.1) is presented, and stability analysis and error estimate are given. In Section 3, a time multi-interval Legendre-tau spectral method is developed, and its error estimate is also obtained. Some numerical results are given in Section 4. Finally, the method is applied to the numerical solution of the 1-D nonlinear Maxwell equation in Section 5.
In this section, a Legendre-tau space-time spectral method is presented for the problem (1.1). Moreover, the stability and the error estimate of this method are given.
Let (⋅,⋅)Q and ‖⋅‖Q be the inner product and the norm of L2(Q), where Q stands for Ω, Ix and It, respectively. For a nonnegative integer m, let ‖⋅‖m,I and |⋅|m,I be the norm and the semi-norm of the classical Sobolev space Hm(I), where I stands for Ix or It, respectively. Define
H10(I)={v∈H1(I):v(−1)=v(1)=0}. |
For a pair of positive integers N and M, define L=(N,M). Let PN(Ix) be the space of polynomials of degree at most N on Ix. Define the polynomial space
VN={v∈PN(Ix)}, |
and the approximation space in space
V0N=H10(Ix)∩VN,VN−1={v∈PN−1(Ix)}. | (2.1) |
Let PM(It) be the space of polynomials of degree at most M on It, we define the approximation space in time
VM={v∈PM(It)},VM−1={v∈PM−1(It)}. | (2.2) |
Let xCj and ωCj(0≤j≤N) be the Chebyshev-Gauss-Lobatto (CGL) points and the corresponding weights on Ix. We define the CGL interpolation operator ICNv∈VN:
ICNv(xCj)=v(xCj),0≤j≤N. |
Similarly, let xLj and ωLj(0≤j≤N) be the Legendre-Gauss-Lobatto (LGL) points and the corresponding weights on Ix. ILNv∈VN denotes the LGL interpolation operator, and
ILNv(xLj)=v(xLj),0≤j≤N. |
We denote by PN:L2(Ix)→VN the L2(Ix)-Legendre projection operator and define P1N:H1(Ix)→VN by
P1Nu(x)=u(−1)+∫x−1PN−1∂xu(y)dy,x∈Ix. | (2.3) |
It is easy to see that
P1Nu(−1)=u(−1),P1Nu(1)=u(1), | (2.4) |
(∂xP1Nu−∂xu,v)=(PN−1∂xu−∂xu,v)=0,∀v∈VN−1. | (2.5) |
Let C be a generic positive constant independent of N, and the following approximation results can be found in [10,24].
Lemma 2.1. If u∈Hr(Ix), then
‖PNu−u‖Ix≤CN−r|u|r,Ix,r≥0,‖ILNu−u‖Ix≤CNl−r|u|r,Ix,r≥1,l=0,1.|P1Nu−u|l,Ix≤CNl−r|u|r,Ix,r≥1,l=0,1. |
Let tCj and ωCj(0≤j≤M) be the CGL points and the corresponding weights on It, and let tLj and ωLj(0≤j≤M) be the LGL points and the corresponding weights on It. We denote by PM:L2(It)→VM the L2(It)-Legendre projection operator and define P1M:H1(It)→VM as
P1Mv(t)=v(0)+∫t0PM−1∂tv(s)ds,t∈It. | (2.6) |
It is easy to find that
P1Mu(−1)=u(−1),P1Mu(1)=u(1), | (2.7) |
(∂tP1Mu−∂tu,v)=(PM−1∂tu−∂tu,v)=0,∀v∈VM−1. | (2.8) |
The following approximation result can be found in [10].
Lemma 2.2. If u∈Hσ(It) and σ≥1, then
|P1Mv−v|l,It≤CMl−σ|v|σ,It,l=0,1, |
where C is a positive constant independent of M.
The problem (1.1) is expressed in a weak form: Find Ez∈H10(Ix)⊗H1(It) and Hy∈L2(Ix)⊗H1(It) such that
{(ϵ∂tEz,v)Ω+(Hy,∂xv)Ω=0,∀v∈H10(Ix)⊗L2(It),(μ∂tHy,w)Ω−(∂xEz,w)Ω=0,∀w∈L2(Ix)⊗L2(It),Ez(x,0)=Ez0(x),Hy(x,0)=Hy0(x),∀x∈Ix. | (2.9) |
The LT-ST scheme to the problem (1.1) is: Find EzL∈V0N⊗VM and HyL∈VN−1⊗VM such that
{(ϵ∂tEzL,v)Ω+(HyL,∂xv)Ω=0,∀v∈V0N⊗VM−1,(μ∂tHyL,w)Ω−(∂xEzL,w)Ω=0,∀w∈VN−1⊗VM−1,EzL(x,0)=ILNEz0(x),HyL(x,0)=PN−1ILNHy0(x),∀x∈Ix. | (2.10) |
In the following section, the stability analysis of (2.10) is considered. Suppose that there are perturbations ˜fi(i=1,2) on the right-hand side. For simplicity, the original notations EzL and HyL are used to represent the solutions to the perturbation problem, which satisfies the following perturbation equation:
{(ϵ∂tEzL,v)Ω+(HyL,∂xv)Ω=(˜f1,v)Ω,∀v∈V0N⊗VM−1,(μ∂tHyL,w)Ω−(∂xEzL,w)Ω=(˜f2,w)Ω,∀w∈VN−1⊗VM−1,EzL(x,0)=0,HyL(x,0)=0,∀x∈Ix. | (2.11) |
Theorem 2.1. Let EzL and HyL are the solutions to (2.11). Suppose that ˜fi(i=1,2) are perturbations on the right-hand side, such that
‖√ϵEzL‖2Ω+‖√μHyL‖2Ω+T(‖√ϵEzL(T)‖2Ix+‖√μHyL(T)‖2Ix)≤CT2(‖~f1‖2Ω+‖~f2‖2Ω). | (2.12) |
Proof. Taking v=˜EzL:=t−1EzL∈V0N⊗VM−1 and w=˜HyL:=t−1HyL∈VN−1⊗VM−1 in (2.11), we get
{(ϵ∂t(t˜EzL),˜EzL)Ω+(t˜HyL,∂x˜EzL)Ω=(˜f1,˜EzL)Ω,(μ∂t(t˜HyL),˜HyL)Ω−(t∂x˜EzL,˜HyL)Ω=(˜f2,˜HyL)Ω, | (2.13) |
which leads to
(ϵ∂t(t˜EzL),˜EzL)Ω+(μ∂t(t˜HyL),˜HyL)Ω=(˜f1,˜EzL)Ω+(˜f2,˜HyL)Ω. | (2.14) |
By integration by parts,
(ϵ∂t(t˜EzL),˜EzL)Ω=(ϵ˜EzL,˜EzL)Ω+(ϵt∂t˜EzL,˜EzL)Ω=‖√ϵ˜EzL‖2Ω+12T‖√ϵ˜EzL(T)‖2Ix−12‖√ϵ˜EzL‖2Ω=12(‖√ϵ˜EzL‖2Ω+T‖√ϵ˜EzL(T)‖2Ix),(μ∂t(t˜HzL),˜HzL)Ω=(μ˜HzL,˜HzL)Ω+(μt∂t˜HzL,˜HzL)Ω=12(‖√μ˜HzL‖2Ω+T‖√μ˜HzL(T)‖2Ix), | (2.15) |
and using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality
|(~f1,˜EzL)Ω+(~f2,˜HyL)Ω|≤‖~f1‖Ω‖˜EzL‖Ω+‖~f2‖Ω‖˜HyL‖Ω≤14(‖√ϵ˜EzL‖2Ω+‖√μ˜HzL‖2Ω)+1ϵ‖~f1‖2Ω+1μ‖~f2‖2Ω, | (2.16) |
where ˜EzL(T) = ˜EzL(x,T) and ˜HyL(T) = ˜HyL(x,T). Substituting (2.15)-(2.16) into (2.14),
14(‖√ϵ˜EzL‖2Ω+‖√μ˜HzL‖2Ω)+T2(‖√ϵ˜EzL(T)‖2Ix+‖√μ˜HzL(T)‖2Ix)≤1ϵ‖~f1‖2Ω+1μ‖~f2‖2Ω. | (2.17) |
and noting that ‖EzL‖Ω≤T‖˜EzL‖Ω,‖HyL‖Ω≤T‖˜HyL‖Ω, we get the result of (2.12).
In the following section, the error estimate of (2.10) is given. In order to deal with the error of the initial value, the following auxiliary problem is considered [25]
{ϵ∂tE=∂xH,(x,t)∈Ω,μ∂tH=∂xE,(x,t)∈Ω,E(−1,t)=E(1,t)=0,t∈It,E(x,0)=ILNEz0(x),H(x,0)=PN−1ILNHy0(x),x∈Ix. | (2.18) |
Firstly, the estimate between the two solutions to (2.10) and (2.18) is considered. We define
Ea=P1NP1ME,Ha=PN−1P1MH. | (2.19) |
By (2.5) and (2.8), we have
(∂tP1ME,v)It=(∂tE,v)It,∀v∈VM−1,(∂xP1NE,w)Ix=(∂xE,w)Ix,∀w∈VN−1, |
and
{(ϵ∂tEa,v)Ω+(Ha,∂xv)Ω=(ϵP1N∂tE,v)Ω−(P1M∂xH,v)Ω,∀v∈V0N⊗VM−1,(μ∂tHa,w)Ω−(∂xEa,w)Ω=(μ∂tH,w)Ω−(P1M∂xE,w)Ω,∀w∈VN−1⊗VM−1. | (2.20) |
Let ez=EzL−Ea and ey=HyL−Ha. By (2.10) and (2.20), the following error equation is obtained
{(ϵ∂tez,v)Ω+(ey,∂xv)Ω=(f1,v)Ω,∀v∈V0N⊗VM−1,(μ∂tey,w)Ω−(∂xez,w)Ω=(f2,w)Ω,∀w∈VN−1⊗VM−1,ez(x,0)=0,ey(x,0)=0,∀x∈Ix. | (2.21) |
Due to (2.18), we have ϵ∂tE=∂xH, μ∂tH=∂xE, and
f1=ϵ(P1M−I)∂tE+(I−P1N)∂xH,f2=μ(P1M−I)∂tH. |
Similar to the proof of Theorem 2.1, we obtain the following error estimate.
Theorem 2.2. Let Ea and Ha be the projections (2.19) of E and H (2.18), respectively. Let EzL and HyL be the solutions to (2.10), respectively. Assuming that σ≥1, r≥2, E,H∈C([0,T];Hr(Ix))∩L2(Ix;Hσ(It)), and then there exists a positive constant C such that
‖√ϵ(EzL−Ea)‖2Ω+‖√μ(HyL−Ha)‖2Ω+T(‖√ϵ(EzL−Ea)(T)‖2Ix+‖√μ(HyL−Ha)(T)‖2Ix)≤CT2[M2(1−σ)(‖∂σtE‖2Ω+‖∂σtH‖2Ω)+N2(1−r)‖∂rxH‖2Ω] | (2.22) |
Proof. By (2.12) and (2.21), we have
‖√ϵez‖2Ω+‖√μey‖2Ω+T(‖√ϵez(T)‖2Ix+‖√μey(T)‖2Ix)≤CT2(‖f1‖2Ω+‖ f2‖2Ω). | (2.23) |
According to Lemma 2.1 and 2.2, it follows that
‖f1‖2Ω≤C(M2(1−σ)‖∂σtE‖2Ω+N2(1−r)‖∂rxH‖2Ω), | (2.24) |
‖f2‖2Ω≤CM2(1−σ)‖∂σtH‖2Ω. | (2.25) |
Substituting (2.24)-(2.25) into (2.23), the error estimate (2.22) is obtained.
Next, the error estimate between the solutions to (2.10) and (1.1) is considered.
Theorem 2.3. Let Ez, Hy, EzL, and HyL be the solutions to (1.1) and (2.10), respectively. Assume that σ≥1, r≥2, E,H∈C([0,T];Hr(Ix))∩L2(Ix;Hσ(It)), and then there exists a positive constant C such that
‖√ϵ(EzL−Ez)‖2Ω+‖√μ(HyL−Hy)‖2Ω+T(‖√ϵ(EzL−Ez)(T)‖2Ix+‖√μ(HyL−Hy)(T)‖2Ix)≤CT2[M2(1−σ)(‖∂σtE‖2Ω+‖∂σtH‖2Ω)+N2(1−r)‖∂rxH‖2Ω]+CTN−2r(‖Ez‖2L∞(0,T;Hr(Ix))+‖Hy‖2L∞(0,T;Hr(Ix))) | (2.26) |
Proof. Firstly, the error between the solutions to (2.18) and (1.1) is estimated. Let ez=E−Ez and ey=H−Hy. By (1.1) and (2.18), we get the following error equation
{ϵ∂tez=∂xey,(x,t)∈Ω,μ∂tey=∂xez,(x,t)∈Ω. | (2.27) |
Then, we consider the inner product on Ix
{(ϵ∂tez,ez)Ix=−(ey,∂xez)Ix,(μ∂tey,ey)Ix=(∂xez,ey)Ix, | (2.28) |
which leads to
‖√ϵez(t)‖2Ix+‖√μey(t)‖2Ix=‖√ϵez(0)‖2Ix+‖√μey(0)‖2Ix,∀t>0. | (2.29) |
Next, integrating over t
‖√ϵez‖2Ω+‖√μey‖2Ω=T(‖√ϵez(0)‖2Ix+‖√μey(0)‖2Ix), | (2.30) |
and taking t=T, we have
‖√ϵez(T)‖2Ix+‖√μey(T)‖2Ix=‖√ϵez(0)‖2Ix+‖√μey(0)‖2Ix. | (2.31) |
According to Lemma 2.1, it follows that
‖ez(0)‖Ix=‖Ez0−ILNEz0‖Ix≤CN−r|Ez0|r,Ix,‖ey(0)‖Ix=‖Hy0−PN−1ILNHy0‖Ix≤‖Hy0−PN−1Hy0‖Ix+‖PN−1(Hy0−ILNHy0)‖Ix≤CN−r|Hy0|r,Ix. | (2.32) |
Substituting (2.32) into (2.30)-(2.31), we obtain
‖√ϵ(E−Ez)‖2Ω+‖√μ(H−Hy)‖2Ω+T(‖√ϵ(E−Ez)(T)‖2Ix+‖√μ(H−Hy)(T)‖2Ix)≤CTN−2r(|Ez|2r,Ix+|Hy0|2r,Ix). | (2.33) |
On the other hand, by Lemmas 2.1-2.2, we have
‖√ϵ(Ea−E)‖2Ω+‖√μ(Ha−H)‖2Ω+T(‖√ϵ(Ea−E)(T)‖2Ix+‖√μ(Ha−H)(T)‖2Ix)≤CTN−2r(|Ez02r,Ix+|Hy0|2r,Ix). | (2.34) |
From (2.22) and (2.33)-(2.34), the error estimate (2.26) is obtained.
In this section, a time multi-interval Legendre-tau spectral scheme is developed and its error estimate is obtained.
Let K be a positive integer and a partition of the computational interval It is given as
It=K⋃k=1Ik,Ik=(ak−1,ak),τk=ak−ak−1,1≤k≤K, | (3.1) |
where
0=a0<a1<⋅⋅⋅<ak<⋅⋅⋅<aK=T. |
Let M=(M1,⋯,MK) and L=(N,M). We define the space of approximate functions in time as
XM=WM∩H1(It),WM={v:v|Ik∈PMk(Ik),1≤k≤K}, | (3.2) |
where PMk(Ik) denotes the space of polynomials of degree at most Mk on Ik. We define the space of the test functions in time as
WM−1={v:v|Ik∈PMk−1(Ik),1≤k≤K}, | (3.3) |
where M−1=(M1−1,⋯,MK−1).
Let ˆI=(−1,1) be a reference interval, ˆtkj and ˆωkj(0≤j≤Mk) be the LGL points and the corresponding weights on ˆI. We denote by {ˆtkj} and {ˆωkj} be the LGL points and the corresponding weights on Ik. Next, we define
IkM={tkj:tkj=τkˆtkj+ak−1+ak2,0≤j≤Mk,1≤k≤K}, |
where τk=ak−ak−1.
Letting vk≡v|Ik, for any u,v∈C(ˉI) and ωkj=12τkˆωkj, we define
(u,v)M,Ik=Mk∑j=0uk(tkj)vk(tkj)ωkj,(u,v)M=K∑k=1(u,v)M,Ik. |
Similarly, we denote ˆtk,Cj and ˆωk,Cj be the CGL points and the corresponding weights on ˆI. Let {ˆtk,Cj} and {ˆωk,Cj} be the CGL points and the corresponding weights on Ik.
We define LGL interpolation operator ILM:C(ˉI)→WM by
ILMu(tkj)=u(tkj),0≤Mk,1≤k≤K. |
Similarly, for the CGL interpolation operator ILM:C(ˉI)→WM, which satisfies
ICMu(tk,Cj)=u(tk,Cj),0≤Mk,1≤k≤K. |
Define the following relation
v(t)=ˆv(ˆt),t=12(τkˆt+ak−1+ak),ak−1≤t≤ak. |
Let ˆPMk−1:L2(ˆI)→PMk−1 the L2-Legendre projection operator by PM−1:L2(It)→WM−1 such that
(PM−1v)|Ik(t)=ˆPMk−1^(v|Ik)(ˆt). |
Let ˆP1,Mk:H1(ˆI)→PMk be the Legendre projection operator, which satisfies
ˆP1,Mkˆv(ˆt)=ˆv(−1)+∫ˆt−1ˆPMk−1∂ˆtˆv(s)ds, |
and P1,M be generated by P1,Mk:H1(Ik)→PMk(Ik) such that
(P1,Mv)|Ik(t)≡P1,Mkv|Ik(t)=ˆP1,Mk^(v|Ik)(ˆt). | (3.4) |
The following approximation results can be found in [10].
Lemma 3.1. If v∈Hσ(It) and σ≥1, then
|P1Mv−v|l,It≤C(K∑k=1(τ−1kMk)2(l−σ)|v|2σ,Ik)12,l=0,1, |
where C is a generic positive constant independent of τk, Mk.
The time multi-interval Legendre-tau spectral method for the problem (1.1) is : Find EkzN∈V0N⊗WM and HkyN∈VN−1⊗WM such that
{(ϵ∂tEKzL,v)Ω+(HKyL,∂xv)Ω=0,∀v∈V0N⊗WM−1,(μ∂tHKyL,w)Ω−(∂xEKzL,w)Ω=0,∀w∈VN−1⊗WM−1,EKzL(x,0)=ILNEz0(x),HKyL(x,0)=PN−1ILNHy0(x),∀x∈Ix. | (3.5) |
We set
vk(x,t)=v(x,t+ak−1),t∈ˆIk=(0,τk),1≤k≤K. |
Let Ωk=Ix׈Ik, and (3.5) can be written as: For 1≤k≤K, find EkzL∈V0N⊗PMk(ˆIk) and HkyL∈VN−1⊗PMk(ˆIk) such that
{(ϵ∂tEkzL,vk)Ωk+(HkyL,∂xvk)Ωk=0,∀vk∈V0N⊗PMk−1(ˆIk),(μ∂tHkyL,wk)Ωk−(∂xEkzL,wk)Ωk=0,∀wk∈VN−1⊗PMk−1(ˆIk),EkzL(x,0)=Ek−1zL(x,τk−1),HkyL(x,0)=Hk−1yN(x,τk−1),x∈Ix, | (3.6) |
where E0zL(x,τ0)=ILNEz0(x),H0yL(x,τ0)=PN−1ILNHy0(x) when k=1.
In the following, we present the error estimate. In order to deal with the error of the initial value, we consider the following auxiliary problems on Ωk,1≤k≤K,
{ϵ∂tEk=∂xHk,(x,t)∈Ωk,μ∂tHk=∂xEk,(x,t)∈Ωk,Ek(x,0)=EkzL(x,0),Hk(x,0)=HkyL(x,0),x∈Ix. | (3.7) |
Similar to the process of the single-interval, we define Eka=P1NP1MkEk, Hka=PN−1P1MkHk, and denote
fk1=ϵ(P1Mk−I)∂tEk+(I−P1N)∂xHk,fk2=μ(P1Mk−I)∂tHk. |
Let ekz=EkzL−Eka and eky=HkyL−Hka, the following error equation is obtained
{(ϵ∂tekz,vk)Ωk+(eky,∂xvk)Ωk=(fk1,vk)Ωk,∀vk∈V0N⊗PMk−1,(μ∂teky,w)Ωk−(∂xekz,wk)Ωk=(fk2,wk)Ωk,∀wk∈VN−1⊗PMk−1,ekz(x,0)=0,eky(x,0)=0,∀x∈Ix. | (3.8) |
For each subinterval in the multi-interval, using Theorem 2.2 and Lemma 3.1, the error estimate between the solution to (3.6) and the projection of the solution to (3.7) is obtained
‖√ϵ(EkzL−Eka)‖2Ωk+‖√μ(HkyL−Hka)‖2Ωk+τk(‖√ϵ(EkzL−Eka)(τk)‖2Ix+‖√μ(HkyL−Hka)(τk)‖2Ix)≤Cτ2k[(τ−1kMk)2(1−σ)(‖∂σtEk‖2Ωk+‖∂σtHk‖2Ωk)+N2(1−r)‖∂rxHk‖2Ωk]. | (3.9) |
Let ekz=Ek−Ekz and eky=Hk−Hky, the results are similar to (2.30)-(2.31) for the multi-interval case,
‖√ϵekz‖2Ωk+‖√μeky‖2Ωk=τk(‖√ϵekz(0)‖2Ix+‖√μeky(0)‖2Ix), | (3.10) |
‖√ϵekz(τk)‖2Ix+‖√μeky(τk)‖2Ix=‖√ϵekz(0)‖2Ix+‖√μeky(0)‖2Ix. | (3.11) |
Using the triangle inequality, we get
√‖√ϵekz(0)‖2xx+‖√μeky(0)‖2Ix=√‖√ϵ(Ek−1zL−Ek−1z)(τk−1)‖2Ix+‖√μ(Hk−1yL−Hk−1y)(τk−1)‖2Ix≤√‖√ϵ(Ek−1zL−Ek−1)(τk−1)‖2Lx+‖√μ(Hk−1yL−Hk−1)(τk−1)‖2lx+√‖√ϵek−1z(τk−1)‖2Ix+‖√μek−1y(τk−1)‖2Ix=√‖√ϵ(Ek−1zL−Ek−1)(τk−1)‖2Ix+‖√μ(Hk−1yL−Hk−1)(τk−1)‖2Ix+√‖√ϵek−1z(0)‖2Ix+‖√μek−1y(0)‖2Ix |
which leads to
√‖√ϵekz(0)‖2Ix+‖√μeky(0)‖2Ix≤k−1∑m=1√‖√ϵ(EmzL−Em)(τm)‖2Ix+‖√μ(HmyL−Hm)(τm)‖2Ix+√‖√ϵe1z(0)‖2Ix+‖√μe1y(0)‖2Ix,∀k≥2 | (3.12) |
By the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, ∑k−1m=1τm=ak−1, and (3.9), we derive
√‖√ϵekz(0)‖2Ix+‖√μeky(0)‖2Ix≤k−1∑m=1√‖√ϵ(EmzL−Em)(τm)‖2Ix+‖√μ(HmyL−Hm)(τm)‖2Ix+√‖√ϵe1z(0)‖2Ix+‖√μe1y(0)‖2Ix,∀k≥2 | (3.13) |
According to (2.7) and Lemma 2.1, it follows that
(k−1∑m=1√‖√ϵ(Ema−Em)(τm)‖2Ix+‖√μ(Hma−Hm)(τm)‖2Ix)2=(k−1∑m=1√‖√ϵ(P1N−I)Em(τm)‖2Ix+‖√μ(PN−1−I)Hm(τm)‖2Ix)2≤Cak−1k−1∑m=1τ−1mN−2r(|Em(τm)|2r,Ix+|Hm(τm)|2r,Ix) | (3.14) |
As (2.32), we have
‖√ϵe1z(0)‖2Ix+‖√μe1y(0)‖2Ix≤CN−2r(|Ez0|2r,Ix+|Hy0|2r,Ix). |
Substituting the above estimation results into (3.10)-(3.11), we obtain
‖√ϵ(Ek−Ekz)‖2Ωk+‖√μ(Hk−Hky)‖2Ωk+τk(‖√ϵ(Ek−Ekz)(τk)‖2Ix+‖√μ(Hk−Hky)(τk)‖2Ix)≤Cak−1τkk−1∑m=1[(τ−1mMm)2(1−σ)(‖∂σtEm‖2Ωm+‖∂σtHm‖2Ωm)+N2(1−r)‖∂rxHm‖2Ωm]+Cak−1τkk−1∑m=1τ−1mN−2r(|Em(τm)|2r,Ix+|Hm(τm)|2r,Ix)+CτkN−2r(|Ez0|2r,Ix+|Hy0|2r,Ix) | (3.15) |
By (2.7), Lemma 2.1 and 2, we get
‖√ϵ(Eka−Ek)‖2Ωk+‖√μ(Hka−Hk)‖2Ωk+τk(‖√ϵ(Eka−Ek)(τk)‖2Ix+‖√μ(Hka−Hk)(τk)‖2Ix)≤C[(τ−1kMk)−2σ(‖∂σtEk‖2Ωk+‖∂σtHk‖2Ωk)+N−2r(‖∂rxEk‖2Ωk+∂rxHk‖2Ωk)]+CτkN−2r(|Ek(τk)|2r,Ix+|Hk(τk)|2r,Ix). | (3.16) |
If τk≡τ,Mk≡M for simplicity, and combining (3.9) and (3.15)-(3.16), we get the following error estimate.
Theorem 3.1. Let Ez and Hy be solutions to (1.1), respectively. Let EKzL and HKyL be solutions to (3.5), respectively. Let Ek and Hk be solutions to (3.7), respectively. Assuming that σ≥1, r≥2, Ez,Hy∈C([0,T];Hr(Ix))∩L2(Ix;Hσ(It)), Ek,Hk∈C([0,τk];Hr(Ix))∩L2(Ix;Hσ(ˆIk)), and then there exists a positive constant C such that
‖√ϵ(EKzL−Ez)‖2Ω+‖√μ(HKyL−Hy)‖2Ω+K∑k=1τk(‖√ϵ(EkzL−Ekz)(τk)‖2Ix+‖√μ(HkyL−Hky)(τk)‖2Ix)≤C[(τ−1M)2(1−σ)+N2(1−r)+τ−2N−2r] | (3.17) |
In this section, some numerical results are presented. We define
E∞(Ez)=max0≤j≤N|EzL(xCj,t)−Ez(xCj,t)|,E∞(Hy)=max0≤j≤N|HyL(xCj,t)−Hy(xCj,t)|. |
Example 4.1. The LT-ST spectral method for the 1-D Maxwell equation
Consider the problem (1.1) with Ix=(0,1), It=(0,1), Ω=Ix×It, ϵ=1, and μ=1. The solution is as
{Ez(x,t)=cos(3πt)sin(3πx),(x,t)∈Ω,Hy(x,t)=sin(3πt)cos(3πx),(x,t)∈Ω. | (4.1) |
In Figure 1, the values of log10 E∞(Ez) and log10 E∞(Hy) is obtained when t=1. It can be seen from Figure 1 that the LT-ST method has spectral accuracy both in the time and space, which is consistent with the results of theoretical analysis.
To check the high accuracy, we compare the numerical errors of our scheme (2.10) with the Legendre-tau spectral method in space and the leapfrog-Crank-Nicolson method in time (LT-LFCN) [19]. For convenience of notation, let (N,τ) be the degree of the polynomial in the space approximation and the time step for the LT-LFCN method.
The L∞-error of the LT-LFCN scheme and our method (2.10) at t=1 are listed in Table 1. It can be seen from Table 1 that on the same PC machine, the proposed method takes shorter time than the LT-LFCN method.
LT-LFCN | LT-ST | ||||||
(N,τ) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time | (N,M) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time |
(8, 1e-02) | 5.14e-04 | 6.85e-03 | 0.19s | (8, 8) | 4.04e-03 | 1.99e-02 | 0.08s |
(12, 1e-03) | 4.35e-06 | 6.97e-06 | 0.49s | (12, 12) | 9.38e-06 | 3.99e-05 | 0.10s |
(16, 1e-04) | 1.29e-09 | 6.96e-07 | 4.94s | (16, 16) | 6.57e-09 | 3.34e-08 | 0.10s |
(20, 1e-05) | 1.03e-13 | 6.98e-09 | 52.81s | (20, 20) | 1.38e-12 | 7.86e-12 | 0.10s |
(24, 1e-06) | 2.83e-14 | 6.97e-11 | 598.48s | (24, 24) | 1.69e-15 | 2.99e-15 | 0.11s |
Example 4.2. The time multi-interval Legendre-tau spectral method for the 1-D Maxwell equation
Further, the method (3.6) is used to solve Example 1 of N=Mk=24 and 0≤t≤5, and the numerical results are shown in Table 2.
t | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time |
1.00 | 1.69e-15 | 2.99e-15 | 0.11s |
2.00 | 3.10e-15 | 3.44e-15 | 0.12s |
3.00 | 3.38e-15 | 3.44e-15 | 0.13s |
4.00 | 5.82e-15 | 7.10e-15 | 0.16s |
5.00 | 9.49e-15 | 7.71e-15 | 0.19s |
In this section, the proposed method is applied to the numerical solution of the 1-D nonlinear Maxwell equation. The approximating of the nonlinear term is calculated by interpolation at the CGL point, and implemented with the help of Fast Legendre transformation.
Now, we apply the LT-ST method to solve the 1-D nonlinear Maxwell equation as [26]
{ϵ∂tEz+J(Ez)−∂xHy=0,(x,t)∈Ω,μ∂tHy−∂xEz=0,(x,t)∈Ω,Ez(−1,t)=Ez(1,t)=0,t∈It,Ez(x,0)=Ez0(x),Hy(x,0)=Hy0(x),x∈Ix, | (5.1) |
where the nonlinear function J(Ez)=σ(|Ez|)Ez with σ(s) is a real valued function representing the electric conductivity.
The problem (5.1) can be written in a weak form: Find Ez∈H10(Ix)⊗H1(It) and Hy∈L2(Ix)⊗H1(It) such that
{(ϵ∂tEz,v)Ω+(J(Ez),v)Ω+(Hy,∂xv)Ω=0,∀v∈H10(Ix)⊗L2(It),(μ∂tHy,w)Ω−(∂xEz,w)Ω=0,∀w∈L2(Ix)⊗L2(It),Ez(x,0)=Ez0(x),Hy(x,0)=Hy0(x),∀x∈Ix. | (5.2) |
Combining the interpolation operator both in space and time, a 2-D interpolation is defined as IL(N,M). The LT-ST method to the problem (5.1) is: Find EzL∈V0N⊗VM and HyL∈VN−1⊗VM such that
{(ϵ∂tEzL,v)Ω+(IC(N,M)J(EzL),v)Ω+(HyL,∂xv)Ω=0,∀v∈V0N⊗VM−1,(μ∂tHyL,w)Ω−(∂xEzL,w)Ω=0,∀w∈VN−1⊗VM−1,EzL(x,0)=ILNEz0(x),HyL(x,0)=PN−1ILNHy0(x),∀x∈Ix, | (5.3) |
We briefly describe the implementation of scheme (5.3). For simplicity, taking Ω=[−1,1]×[−1,1]. Let Lk be the Legendre polynomial of degree k, and the basis functions in space are
Φ(x)=(1−x2,1+x2,ϕ2(x),...,ϕN(x)), |
Φ0(x)=(ϕ2(x),...,ϕN(x)),L(x)=(L0(x),L1(x),...,LN−1(x)), |
where ϕk(x)=Lk(x)−Lk−2(x).
The basis functions in time are
Ψ(t)=(1,1+t,ϕ2(t),...,ϕM(t)),L(t)=(L0(t),L1(t),...,LM−1(t)), |
where ϕk(t)=Lk(t)−Lk−2(t).
The approximate solutions and the test functions are expressed as
EzL(x,t)=Ψ(t)ˆEΦT(x),HyL(x,t)=Ψ(t)ˆHLT(x)v(x,t)=L(t)ˆvΦT0(x),w(x,t)=L(t)ˆwLT(x) |
The interpolation polynomial of the nonlinear term can be expressed as IC(N,M)J(EzL)=Ψ(t)ˆJΦT(x). The following algebraic equation is obtained from (5.3)
{ϵ(∂tΨ,L)ItˆE(Φ0,Φ)Ix+(Ψ,L)ItˆJ(Φ0,Φ)Ix+(Ψ,L)ItˆH(∂xΦ0,L)Ix=0,μ(∂tΨ,L)ItˆH(L,L)Ix−(Ψ,L)ItˆE(L,∂xΦ)Ix=0, | (5.4) |
where ˆE and ˆH are matrices composed of coefficients of approximate solutions EzL and HyL, respectively. For simplicity, (5.4) can be rewritten in matrix form as
{ϵKtˆEMx+MtˆJMx+MtˆHKx0=0,μKtˆHD−MtˆEKxT=0. | (5.5) |
A simple implicit-explicit iteration method is used to solve (5.5). In order to separate the initial conditions from the coefficient matrix, ˆE, ˆH, Mt is divided into the following forms as
ˆE=[ˆEiˆE0],ˆH=[ˆHiˆH0],Mt=[MtiMt0], | (5.6) |
where ^Ei and ^Hi are the first rows of the coefficient matrix ˆE and ˆH respectively, corresponding to the initial value, Mti is the first column of Mt. By the properties of the basis function and the orthogonality of Legendre polynomials show that both Kt and D are diagonal matrices, and the elements on the diagonal of Kt are 2 except that the first element is zero. Thus, (5.5) can be expressed as
4ϵμˆE0Mx+(Mt0)2ˆE0Kxx=−2μMtˆJMx−2μMti^HiKx0−Mt0Mti^EiKxx, | (5.7) |
2μˆH0=Mt0ˆE0KxTD−1+Mti^EiKxTD−1. | (5.8) |
Let
G=−2μMti^HiKx0−Mt0Mti^EiKxx, |
In computations. We use the following simple explicit-implicit iteration scheme for (5.7),
4ϵμˆE[k+1]0Mx+(Mt0)2ˆE[k+1]0Kxx=−2μMtˆJ[k]Mx+G,k=0,1,⋯, | (5.9) |
when k=0, using the initial information of EzL in (5.3), and taking E[0]zL(t)≡EzL(0) as the initial guess of the iteration. The iterative scheme (5.9) is a linear equation of ˆE[k+1]0, which can be solved by the method in [10].
Combining the interpolation operator in space and the multi-interval interpolation operator in time in Section 3, a 2-D interpolation is defined as IL(N,M). The time multi-interval Legendre-tau spectral method for (5.1) is: Find EkzN∈V0N⊗WM and HkyN∈VN−1⊗WM such that
{(ϵ∂tEKzL,v)Ω+(IL(N,M)J(EKzL),v)Ω+(HKyL,∂xv)Ω=0,∀v∈V0N⊗WM−1,(μ∂tHKyL,w)Ω−(∂xEKzL,w)Ω=0,∀w∈VN−1⊗WM−1,EKzL(x,0)=ILNEz0(x),HKyL(x,0)=PN−1ILNHy0(x),∀x∈Ix, | (5.10) |
In computation, the interval is shifted to ˆIk=(0,τk). Let Ωk=Ix׈Ik, and then (5.10) can be written as: Find EkzL∈V0N⊗PMk(ˆIk) and HkyL∈VN−1⊗PMk(ˆIk),1≤k≤K, such that
{(ϵ∂tEkzL,vk)Ωk+(IL(N,Mk)J(EkzL),vk)Ωk+(HkyL,∂xvk)Ωk=0,∀vk∈V0N⊗PMk−1(ˆIk),(μ∂tHkyL,wk)Ωk−(∂xEkzL,wk)Ωk=0,∀wk∈VN−1⊗PMk−1(ˆIk),EkzL(x,0)=Ek−1zL(x,τk−1),HkyL(x,0)=Hk−1yN(x,τk−1),x∈Ix, | (5.11) |
where E0zL(x,τ0)=ILNEz0(x) and H0yL(x,τ0)=PN−1ILNHy0(x) when k=1.
Example 5.1. The LT-ST method for the 1-D nonlinear Maxwell equation
Consider the problem (5.1), and set the right-hand function of the first equation to f(x,t). According to [26], the nonlinear term is given as
J(Ez)=(|Ez|2−|Ez|4)Ez, |
where Ix=(0,1), It=(0,1), Ω=Ix×It, and ϵ=μ=1. The solution is
{Ez(x,t)=cos(3πt)sin(3πx),(x,t)∈Ω,Hy(x,t)=sin(3πt)cos(3πx),(x,t)∈Ω, | (5.12) |
and the right-hand side of the first equation is
f(x,t)=cos(3πt)3sin(3πx)3−cos(3πt)5sin(3πx)5,(x,t)∈Ω. | (5.13) |
The scheme (5.3) is used to solve Example 5.1, and the values of log10 E∞(Ez) and log10 E∞(Hy) are obtained when t=1. It can be seen from Figure 2 that the method has high accuracy both in time and space.
ItNum represents the number of iterations. Further, the method (5.11) is used to solve Example 5.1 in the case of N=Mk=24 and 0≤t≤5, the numerical results are shown in Table 3.
t | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time | ItNum |
1.00 | 1.72e-15 | 2.83e-15 | 0.17s | 10 |
2.00 | 3.72e-15 | 3.44e-15 | 0.32s | 10 |
3.00 | 4.11e-15 | 4.10e-15 | 0.49s | 10 |
4.00 | 6.30e-15 | 6.55e-15 | 0.65s | 10 |
5.00 | 1.04e-14 | 8.93e-15 | 0.81s | 10 |
Example 5.2. Comparison of the LT-ST method of 1-D nonlinear Maxwell equation and related computation results
Consider the same problem as in Example 5.1, but the nonlinear is given as [26]
J(Ez)=|Ez|12Ez. |
Taking the same solution (5.12), the right-hand function of the first equation is
f(x,t)=cos(3πt)sin(3πx)√|cos(3πt)sin(3πx)|,(x,t)∈Ω. | (5.14) |
The Scheme (5.3) is applied to Example 5.1, and the values of log10 E∞(Ez) and log10 E∞(Hy) is obtained when t=1. Computational results are given in Figure 3 to show that the LT-ST method has high accuracy both in time and space.
In order to compare the accuracy with the LT-LFCN method, we use it and the LT-ST method to computate Example 5.2, respectively. The LT-LFCN method is as follows:
Let τ be the time step, tk=kτ(k=0,1,⋅⋅⋅,nT;T=nTτ). Denote uk(x):=u(x,kτ), and we define
ukˆt=uk+1−uk−12τ,uˉk=uk+1+uk−12. |
The LT-LFCN scheme to the problem (5.1) is: For 1≤k≤nT−1, find EkzN∈V0N and HkyN∈VN−1 such that
{(ϵEkzNˆt,v)+(HˉkyN,∂xv)+(INJ(EkzN),v)=0,∀v∈V0N,(μHkyNˆt,w)−(∂xEˉkzN,w)=0,∀w∈VN−1E0zN=ILNEz0,E1zN=ILN[Ez0+τ∂tEz(0)],H0yN=PLN−1INHy0,H1yN=PLN−1IN[Hy0+τ∂tHy(0)]. | (5.15) |
The L∞-error of the LT-LFCN method (5.15) and the proposed method (5.3) at t=1 are shown in Table 4. The results in Table 4 demonstrate that on the same PC machine, the proposed method provides more accurate results using less time than the LT-LFCN method.
LT-LFCN | LT-ST | ||||||
(N,τ) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time | (N,M) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time |
(8, 1e-02) | 1.86e-03 | 1.98e-02 | 0.21s | (8, 8) | 4.13e-03 | 1.99e-02 | 0.16s |
(12, 1e-03) | 2.22e-05 | 1.46e-04 | 0.71s | (12, 12) | 9.41e-06 | 3.98e-05 | 0.17s |
(16, 1e-04) | 1.65e-07 | 1.56e-06 | 7.86s | (16, 16) | 6.55e-09 | 3.33e-08 | 0.18s |
(20, 1e-05) | 1.50e-09 | 1.56e-08 | 82.99s | (20, 20) | 1.37e-12 | 7.86e-12 | 0.18s |
(24, 1e-06) | 1.59e-11 | 1.58e-10 | 863.42s | (24, 24) | 1.77e-15 | 2.77e-15 | 0.19s |
The scheme (5.11) is also used to solve Example 5.2 for long-time computation. Numerical results are given in Table 5 with N=Mk=24 and 0≤t≤5 to show the effectiveness of the LT-ST method.
t | L∞(Ez) | L∞(Hy) | time | ItNum |
1.00 | 1.77e-15 | 2.77e-15 | 0.19s | 12 |
2.00 | 3.33e-15 | 4.88e-15 | 0.36s | 11 |
3.00 | 3.77e-15 | 4.21e-15 | 0.55s | 12 |
4.00 | 6.77e-15 | 7.21e-15 | 0.73s | 11 |
5.00 | 9.85e-15 | 9.35e-15 | 0.91s | 11 |
In this paper, the LT-ST method is investigated for the 1-D Maxwell equation and the time multi-interval Legendre-tau spectral method is considered. Error estimates for the method of single and multidomain are given, respectively. Numerical results are consistent with the theoretical analysis. Compared with the LT-LFCN method, the proposed method has advantages in accuracy and computation time. Moreover, the space-time spectral method is developed for the numerical solutions of the 1-D nonlinear Maxwell equation. In the future, the multidomain spectral method in space will be developed to solve the case of inhomogeneous media.
The research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants No. 11971016).
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
[1] |
S. M. Aguillon, G. F. Siegmund, R. H. Petipas, A. G. Drake, S. Cotner, C. J. Ballen, Gender Differences in Student Participation in an Active-Learning Classroom, CBE—Life Sci. Educ., 19 (2020), 2. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-03-0048 doi: 10.1187/cbe.19-03-0048
![]() |
[2] | R. Alexander, Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk, 3rd Eds., Cambridge: Dialogos, 2008. |
[3] |
R. Alexander, Developing dialogic teaching: Genesis, process, trial, Res. Pap. Educ., 33 (2018), 561–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2018.1481140 doi: 10.1080/02671522.2018.1481140
![]() |
[4] |
P. Andrews, A. Ryve, K. Hemmi, J. Sayers, PISA, TIMSS and Finnish mathematics teaching: An enigma in search of an explanation, Educ. Stud. Math., 87 (2014), 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9545-3 doi: 10.1007/s10649-014-9545-3
![]() |
[5] |
E. Carter, E. Molina, A. Pushparatnam, S. Rimm-Kaufman, M. Tsapali, K. K.-Y. Wong, Evidence-based teaching: Effective teaching practices in primary school classrooms, London Rev. Educ., 22 (2024), 8. https://doi.org/10.14324/LRE.22.1.08 doi: 10.14324/LRE.22.1.08
![]() |
[6] |
D. Clarke, Contingent conceptions of accomplished practice: The cultural specificity of discourse in and about the mathematics classroom, ZDM Math. Educ., 45 (2013), 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0452-8 doi: 10.1007/s11858-012-0452-8
![]() |
[7] |
S. J. Correll, Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self-assessments, Am. J. Soc., 106 (2001), 1691–1730. https://doi.org/10.1086/321299 doi: 10.1086/321299
![]() |
[8] |
O. G. Drageset, Student and teacher interventions: a framework for analysing mathematical discourse in the classroom, J. Math. Teacher Educ., 18 (2015), 253–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-014-9280-9 doi: 10.1007/s10857-014-9280-9
![]() |
[9] | I. H. Erten, Social Desirability Bias in Altruistic Motivation for Choosing Teaching as a Career, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30 (2015), 77–89. |
[10] |
M. Gil-Izquierdo, J. M. Cordero, V. Cristóbal, Teaching strategy specialization and student achievement, Educ. Econ., 31 (2023), 755–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2023.2169252 doi: 10.1080/09645292.2023.2169252
![]() |
[11] |
W.-M. Hsu, Examining the Types of Mathematical Tasks Used to Explore the Mathematics Instruction by Elementary School Teachers, Creat. Education, 4 (2013), 396–404. http://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2013.46056 doi: 10.4236/ce.2013.46056
![]() |
[12] |
E. Jouini, P. Karehnke, C. Napp, Stereotypes, under-confidence and decision-making with an application to gender and math, J. Econ. Behav. O., 148 (2018), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2018.02.002 doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2018.02.002
![]() |
[13] |
J. König, S. Blömeke, A. Jentsch, L. Schlesinger, C. Nehls, F. Musekamp, et al., The links between pedagogical competence, instructional quality, and mathematics achievement in the lower secondary classroom, Educ. Stud. Math., 107 (2021), 189–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10021-0 doi: 10.1007/s10649-020-10021-0
![]() |
[14] |
S. M. Koziol, P. Burns, Teachers' Accuracy in Self-Reporting about Instructional Practices Using a Focused Self Report Inventory, J. Educ. Res., 79 (1986), 205–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1986.10885678 doi: 10.1080/00220671.1986.10885678
![]() |
[15] | C. Y. R. Loh, T. C. Teo, Understanding Asian Students Learning Styles, Cultural Influence and Learning Strategies, J. Educ. Soc. Policy, 7 (2017), 1. |
[16] |
M. McMurran, D. Weisbart, K. Atit, The relationship between students' gender and their confidence in the correctness of their solutions to complex and difficult mathematics problems, Learn. Individ. Differ., 107 (2023), 102349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102349 doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102349
![]() |
[17] |
N. Mercer, L. Dawes, R. Wegerif, C. Sams, Reasoning as a scientist: Ways of helping children to use language to learn science, Br. Educ. Res. J., 30 (2004), 3. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920410001689689 doi: 10.1080/01411920410001689689
![]() |
[18] | E. Molina, A. Pushparatnam, S. Rimm-Kaufman, K. K. Wong, Effective Teaching Practices in Primary School Classrooms, Policy Research Working Paper 8656, 2018. Available from: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/pt/552391543437324357/pdf/WPS8656.pdf. |
[19] |
B. Moorhouse, Y. Li, S. Walsh, E-Classroom Interactional Competencies: Mediating and Assisting Language Learning During Synchronous Online Lessons, RELC J., 54 (2021), 114–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220985274 doi: 10.1177/0033688220985274
![]() |
[20] | K. Morrison, Paradox Lost: Toward a Robust Test of the Chinese Learner, Educ. J., 34 (2006), 1. |
[21] | I. V. S. Mullis, M. O. Martin, TIMSS 2019 Assessment Frameworks, 2017. Available from: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/frameworks/ |
[22] |
M. Niederle, L. Vesterlund, Explaining the Gender Gap in Math Test Scores: The Role of Competition, J. Econ. Perspect., 24 (2010), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.24.2.129 doi: 10.1257/jep.24.2.129
![]() |
[23] |
E. Oster, Unobservable Selection and Coefficient Stability: Theory and Evidence, J. Bus. Econ. Stat., 37 (2017), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.2016.1227711 doi: 10.1080/07350015.2016.1227711
![]() |
[24] |
E. Oz, Comparability of teachers' educational background items in TIMSS: A case from Turkey, Large-scale Assess. Educ., 9 (2021), 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-021-00097-2 doi: 10.1186/s40536-021-00097-2
![]() |
[25] |
A. K. Praetorius, E. Klieme, B. Herbert, P. Pinger, Generic dimensions of teaching quality: The German framework of Three Basic Dimensions, ZDM Math. Educ., 50 (2018), 407–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0918-4 doi: 10.1007/s11858-018-0918-4
![]() |
[26] |
E. Saito, R. Takahashi, J. Wintachai, A. Anunthavorasakul, Issues in introducing collaborative learning in South East Asia: A critical discussion, Manage. Educ., 35 (2021), 167–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020620932367 doi: 10.1177/0892020620932367
![]() |
[27] |
P. Sancassani, The effect of teacher subject-specific qualifications on student science achievement, Labour Econ., 80 (2023), 102309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2022.102309 doi: 10.1016/j.labeco.2022.102309
![]() |
[28] |
Q. Shi, Relationship Between Teacher Efficacy and Self-Reported Instructional Practices: An Examination of Five Asian Countries/Regions Using TIMSS 2011 Data, Front. Educ. China, 9 (2014), 577–602. https://doi.org/10.3868/s110-003-014-0045-x doi: 10.3868/s110-003-014-0045-x
![]() |
[29] |
A. Tadesse, S. Lehesvuori, H. Posti-Ahokas, J. Moate, The learner-centred interactive pedagogy classroom: Its implications for dialogic interaction in Eritrean secondary schools, Think. Skills Creat., 50 (2023), 101379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101379 doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101379
![]() |
[30] |
R. Tytler, G. Aranda, Expert Teachers' Discursive Moves in Science Classroom Interactive Talk, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 13 (2015), 425–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9617-6 doi: 10.1007/s10763-015-9617-6
![]() |
[31] | UNESCO, Integration of Gender-Responsive Pedagogy in pre- and in-service teacher training courses in Ethiopia, Bangkok: UNESCO Bangkok, 2017. |
[32] | UNESCO Bangkok, Preparation of a comprehensive Gender-Responsive Pedagogy (GRP) Toolkit, 2017. Available from: https://bangkok.unesco.org/sites/default/files/assets/article/Teachers%20Education/GenderAssessment-May2017/Solomon-UNESCO_IICBA.pdf |
[33] | M. Von Davier, E. Gonzalez, W. Schulz, Ensuring validity in international comparisons using state-of-the-art psychometric methodologies, In: Reliability and Validity of International Large-Scale Assessment, Cham: Springer, 2020,187–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53081-5_11 |
[34] | S. Walsh, Classroom Discourse and Teacher Development, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2013. |
[35] |
M. Walshaw, G. Anthony, The teacher's role in classroom discourse: A review of recent research into mathematics classrooms, Rev. Educ. Res., 78 (2008), 516–551. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308320292 doi: 10.3102/0034654308320292
![]() |
[36] | D. A. Watkins, J. B. Biggs, The Chinese learner: Cultural, psychological and contextual influences, Hong Kong, Melbourne: Comparative Education Research Centre & Australian Council for Educational Research, 1996. |
[37] | H. Wursten, C. Jacobs, The impact of culture on education. Can we introduce best practices in education across countries? ITIM Int., 1 (2013), 1–28. |
[38] |
L. Xu, D. Clarke, Meta-rules of discursive practice in mathematics classrooms from Seoul, Shanghai, and Tokyo, ZDM-Int. J. Math. Educ., 45 (2013), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0442-x doi: 10.1007/s11858-012-0442-x
![]() |
[39] |
Y. Zhu, G. Kaiser, Impacts of classroom teaching practices on students' mathematics learning interest, mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics test achievements: A secondary analysis of Shanghai data from the international video study Global Teaching InSights, ZDM Math. Educ. 54 (2022), 581–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-022-01343-9 doi: 10.1007/s11858-022-01343-9
![]() |
1. | Haizhou Liu, Yixin Huang, Yang Zhao, A step-by-step Chebyshev space-time spectral method for force vibration of functionally graded structures, 2025, 41, 0567-7718, 10.1007/s10409-024-24193-x | |
2. | Wenting Shao, Cheng Chen, A fourth order Runge-Kutta type of exponential time differencing and triangular spectral element method for two dimensional nonlinear Maxwell's equations, 2025, 207, 01689274, 348, 10.1016/j.apnum.2024.09.008 | |
3. | Olga Podvigina, An efficient Galerkin method for problems with physically realistic boundary conditions, 2025, 309, 00104655, 109482, 10.1016/j.cpc.2024.109482 |
LT-LFCN | LT-ST | ||||||
(N,τ) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time | (N,M) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time |
(8, 1e-02) | 5.14e-04 | 6.85e-03 | 0.19s | (8, 8) | 4.04e-03 | 1.99e-02 | 0.08s |
(12, 1e-03) | 4.35e-06 | 6.97e-06 | 0.49s | (12, 12) | 9.38e-06 | 3.99e-05 | 0.10s |
(16, 1e-04) | 1.29e-09 | 6.96e-07 | 4.94s | (16, 16) | 6.57e-09 | 3.34e-08 | 0.10s |
(20, 1e-05) | 1.03e-13 | 6.98e-09 | 52.81s | (20, 20) | 1.38e-12 | 7.86e-12 | 0.10s |
(24, 1e-06) | 2.83e-14 | 6.97e-11 | 598.48s | (24, 24) | 1.69e-15 | 2.99e-15 | 0.11s |
t | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time |
1.00 | 1.69e-15 | 2.99e-15 | 0.11s |
2.00 | 3.10e-15 | 3.44e-15 | 0.12s |
3.00 | 3.38e-15 | 3.44e-15 | 0.13s |
4.00 | 5.82e-15 | 7.10e-15 | 0.16s |
5.00 | 9.49e-15 | 7.71e-15 | 0.19s |
t | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time | ItNum |
1.00 | 1.72e-15 | 2.83e-15 | 0.17s | 10 |
2.00 | 3.72e-15 | 3.44e-15 | 0.32s | 10 |
3.00 | 4.11e-15 | 4.10e-15 | 0.49s | 10 |
4.00 | 6.30e-15 | 6.55e-15 | 0.65s | 10 |
5.00 | 1.04e-14 | 8.93e-15 | 0.81s | 10 |
LT-LFCN | LT-ST | ||||||
(N,τ) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time | (N,M) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time |
(8, 1e-02) | 1.86e-03 | 1.98e-02 | 0.21s | (8, 8) | 4.13e-03 | 1.99e-02 | 0.16s |
(12, 1e-03) | 2.22e-05 | 1.46e-04 | 0.71s | (12, 12) | 9.41e-06 | 3.98e-05 | 0.17s |
(16, 1e-04) | 1.65e-07 | 1.56e-06 | 7.86s | (16, 16) | 6.55e-09 | 3.33e-08 | 0.18s |
(20, 1e-05) | 1.50e-09 | 1.56e-08 | 82.99s | (20, 20) | 1.37e-12 | 7.86e-12 | 0.18s |
(24, 1e-06) | 1.59e-11 | 1.58e-10 | 863.42s | (24, 24) | 1.77e-15 | 2.77e-15 | 0.19s |
t | L∞(Ez) | L∞(Hy) | time | ItNum |
1.00 | 1.77e-15 | 2.77e-15 | 0.19s | 12 |
2.00 | 3.33e-15 | 4.88e-15 | 0.36s | 11 |
3.00 | 3.77e-15 | 4.21e-15 | 0.55s | 12 |
4.00 | 6.77e-15 | 7.21e-15 | 0.73s | 11 |
5.00 | 9.85e-15 | 9.35e-15 | 0.91s | 11 |
LT-LFCN | LT-ST | ||||||
(N,τ) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time | (N,M) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time |
(8, 1e-02) | 5.14e-04 | 6.85e-03 | 0.19s | (8, 8) | 4.04e-03 | 1.99e-02 | 0.08s |
(12, 1e-03) | 4.35e-06 | 6.97e-06 | 0.49s | (12, 12) | 9.38e-06 | 3.99e-05 | 0.10s |
(16, 1e-04) | 1.29e-09 | 6.96e-07 | 4.94s | (16, 16) | 6.57e-09 | 3.34e-08 | 0.10s |
(20, 1e-05) | 1.03e-13 | 6.98e-09 | 52.81s | (20, 20) | 1.38e-12 | 7.86e-12 | 0.10s |
(24, 1e-06) | 2.83e-14 | 6.97e-11 | 598.48s | (24, 24) | 1.69e-15 | 2.99e-15 | 0.11s |
t | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time |
1.00 | 1.69e-15 | 2.99e-15 | 0.11s |
2.00 | 3.10e-15 | 3.44e-15 | 0.12s |
3.00 | 3.38e-15 | 3.44e-15 | 0.13s |
4.00 | 5.82e-15 | 7.10e-15 | 0.16s |
5.00 | 9.49e-15 | 7.71e-15 | 0.19s |
t | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time | ItNum |
1.00 | 1.72e-15 | 2.83e-15 | 0.17s | 10 |
2.00 | 3.72e-15 | 3.44e-15 | 0.32s | 10 |
3.00 | 4.11e-15 | 4.10e-15 | 0.49s | 10 |
4.00 | 6.30e-15 | 6.55e-15 | 0.65s | 10 |
5.00 | 1.04e-14 | 8.93e-15 | 0.81s | 10 |
LT-LFCN | LT-ST | ||||||
(N,τ) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time | (N,M) | E∞(Ez) | E∞(Hy) | time |
(8, 1e-02) | 1.86e-03 | 1.98e-02 | 0.21s | (8, 8) | 4.13e-03 | 1.99e-02 | 0.16s |
(12, 1e-03) | 2.22e-05 | 1.46e-04 | 0.71s | (12, 12) | 9.41e-06 | 3.98e-05 | 0.17s |
(16, 1e-04) | 1.65e-07 | 1.56e-06 | 7.86s | (16, 16) | 6.55e-09 | 3.33e-08 | 0.18s |
(20, 1e-05) | 1.50e-09 | 1.56e-08 | 82.99s | (20, 20) | 1.37e-12 | 7.86e-12 | 0.18s |
(24, 1e-06) | 1.59e-11 | 1.58e-10 | 863.42s | (24, 24) | 1.77e-15 | 2.77e-15 | 0.19s |
t | L∞(Ez) | L∞(Hy) | time | ItNum |
1.00 | 1.77e-15 | 2.77e-15 | 0.19s | 12 |
2.00 | 3.33e-15 | 4.88e-15 | 0.36s | 11 |
3.00 | 3.77e-15 | 4.21e-15 | 0.55s | 12 |
4.00 | 6.77e-15 | 7.21e-15 | 0.73s | 11 |
5.00 | 9.85e-15 | 9.35e-15 | 0.91s | 11 |