2012
DOI: 10.1090/s0025-5718-2012-02617-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimal error estimates of finite difference methods for the Gross-Pitaevskii equation with angular momentum rotation

Abstract: Abstract. We analyze finite difference methods for the Gross-Pitaevskii equation with an angular momentum rotation term in two and three dimensions and obtain the optimal convergence rate, for the conservative Crank-Nicolson finite difference (CNFD) method and semi-implicit finite difference (SIFD) method, at the order of O(h 2 + τ 2 ) in the l 2 -norm and discrete H 1 -norm with time step τ and mesh size h. Besides the standard techniques of the energy method, the key technique in the analysis for the SIFD me… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
159
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 155 publications
(161 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
1
159
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This confirms our error estimates (2.22) and (2.23) for SIFD. Table 5.3 presents the errors of SIFD at the degeneracy regime for α = 2 in the regime τ ∼ ε 2 , and resp., for α = 0 in the regime τ ∼ ε 3 , predicted by our error estimates. The results clearly demonstrate that SIFD converges at O(h 2 + τ ) and O(h 2 + τ 2/3 ) for α = 2 and α = 0, respectively.…”
Section: Lemma 34 Under the Assumptions In Theoremsupporting
confidence: 64%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…This confirms our error estimates (2.22) and (2.23) for SIFD. Table 5.3 presents the errors of SIFD at the degeneracy regime for α = 2 in the regime τ ∼ ε 2 , and resp., for α = 0 in the regime τ ∼ ε 3 , predicted by our error estimates. The results clearly demonstrate that SIFD converges at O(h 2 + τ ) and O(h 2 + τ 2/3 ) for α = 2 and α = 0, respectively.…”
Section: Lemma 34 Under the Assumptions In Theoremsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…However, for such a scheme, at each time step, a fully nonlinear system has to be solved very accurately, which may be very time-consuming, especially in 2D and 3D. In fact, if the nonlinear system is not solved very accurately, the numerical solution computed doesn't conserve the energy and/or mass exactly [3]. This motivates us also to consider the following SIFD discretization for NLSW in which at each time step only a linear system needs to be solved and it usually can be solved by fast direct Poisson solver.…”
Section: Finite Difference Schemes and Main Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To test the performance of our method, we compare it with some representative methods in the literature for computing the dynamics of rotating BECs, including the Crank-Nicolson finite difference (CNFD) method [9,29,38], the semi-implicit finite difference (SIFD) method [9,29], and the TSADI method [14]. Note that these methods solve the GPE in Eulerian coordinates.…”
Section: Comparisons Of Different Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [13], a generalized Laguerre-FourierHermite pseudospectral method was presented in polar/cylindrical coordinates, which has spectral order of accuracy in all spatial directions. These methods have higher spatial accuracy compared to the finite difference/element methods in [3,9,29] and are also valid in dissipative variants of the GPE (1.1); cf. [46].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%