The possibility of constructing a conservative numerical method for the solution of the cauchy problem for Hamiltonian systems based on two-stage symmetric symplectic Runge–Kutta methods

Article
  • 19 Downloads

Abstract

We study the possibility of constructing a computational method for solving the Cauchy problem for Hamiltonian systems, which yields an approximate solution satisfying the law of total energy conservation. The presented technique is based on a family of two-stage symmetric symplectic Runge–Kutta methods. The properties of the proposed method are investigated for the case of a model problem on a material point motion in a cubic field potential. The possibility of working out the method yielding a numerical solution, which preserves the total energy over the period of the problem finite solution except for small neighborhoods of cusps. Time dependences of the symplecticity and reversibility defects are studied on the numerical solution obtained by the constructed method.

Keywords

molecular dynamics Hamiltonian systems numerical methods for the solution of the Cauchy problem energy conservation Runge–Kutta methods 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    M. P. Allen and D. J. Tildesley, Computer Simulation of Liquids (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1991).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Computational Molecular Dynamics: Challenges, Methods, Ideas, Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering, Vol. 4, Ed. by P. Deuflhard, J. Hermans, B. Leimkuhler, et al. (Springer, Berlin, 1998).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. Hairer, C. Lubich, and G. Wanner, Geometric Numerical Integration, 2nd rev. ed. (Springer, Berlin, 2006).MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    E. Hairer, S. P. Norsett, and G. Wanner, Solving Ordinary Differential Equations I. Nonstiff Problems, 2nd rev. ed. (Springer, 1993).MATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Course of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 1: Mechanics (Nauka, Moscow, 1982; Pergamon Press, New York, 1988).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    F. M. Lasagni, “Canonical Runge-Kutta methods,” J. Appl. Math. Phys. 39, 952–953 (1988).MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. M. Sanz-Serna, “Runge-Kutta schemes for Hamiltonian systems,” BIT 28, 877–883 (1988).MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Y. B. Suris, “On the conservation of the symplectic structure in the numerical solution of Hamiltonian systems,” in Numerical Solution of Ordinary Differential Equations (Keldysh Inst. Applied Mathematics, USSR Acad. Sci., Moscow, 1988), pp. 148–160.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    G. G. Elenin and P. A. Aleksandrov, “Exact solutions of the resolving equations system of symmetrically-symplectic Runge-Kutta methods family for problem about material point motion in the cubic potential field,” Preprint (MAKS Press, Moscow, 2011).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. G. Elenin and P. I. Shlyakhov, “On the conservativeness of two-stage symmetric-symplectic Runge–Kutta methods and the Störmer–Verlet method,” Differ. Equations 46, 991 (2010).MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    G. G. Elenin and P. A. Aleksandrov, “On the conservativeness of a two-parameter family of three-stage symmetric-symplectic Runge–Kutta methods,” Differ. Equations 48, 965 (2012).MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    W. Oevel and M. Sofroniou, “Symplectic Runge-Kutta schemes II: classification of symmetric methods,” Preprint (University of Paderborn, 1996).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    P. A. Aleksandrov and G. G. Elenin, “The number of solutions for the resolving equations system of symmetrically-symplectic Runge-Kutta methods family for problem about material point motion in the cubic potential field,” Preprint (MAKS Press, Moscow, 2010).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    P. A. Aleksandrov and G. G. Elenin, “Exact solutions of the resolving equations system of symmetrically-symplectic Runge-Kutta methods family for problem about material point motion in the cubic potential field,” Preprint (MAKS Press, Moscow, 2011).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. V. Attetkov, S. V. Galkin, and V. S. Zarubin, Optimization Methods, The School-Book for Higher Schools, Ed. by V. S. Zarubin and A. P. Krishchenko (Mosk. Gos. Tekh. Univ. im. N. E. Baumana, Moscow, 2003) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    F. P. Vasil’ev, Numerical Methods for Solving the Extremal Problems (Nauka, Moscow, 1988) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    V. P. Korneenko, Optimization Methods, The School-Book (Vyssh. Shkola, Moscow, 2007) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    D. E. Muller, “A method for solving algebraic equations using an automatic computer,” Math. Tables Other Aids Comput. 10, 208–215 (1956).MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. Samarskii and A. Gulin, Numerical Methods (Nauka, Moskow, 1989) [in Russian].MATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    G. G. Elenin and P. I. Shlyakhov, “The geometric structure of the parameter space of the three stage symplectic Runge–Kutta methods,” Math. Models Comput. Simul. 3, 680 (2011).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    J. D. Hunter, “Matplotlib: a 2D graphics environment,” Comput. Sci. Eng. 9, 90–95 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Moscow State UniversityMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations