Computation and Control III pp 285-299 | Cite as

# Condition Numbers for the Sinc Matrices Associated with Discretizing the Second-Order Differential Operator

Chapter

## Abstract

The Sinc-Galerkin discretizations of the model equations
and
are briefly outlined below in Sections 2 and 3, respectively. Detailed discussions of the discretization of more general, linear, second-order spatial operators are found in [9, 10, 5, 8]. The emphasis here is presenting results regarding condition numbers for the linear systems affiliated with (1.1) and (1.2). These condition numbers vary widely depending on how the linear systems are posed. Adroit changes of variables can lead to well-conditioned linear systems while poor choices can magnify existing problems. The importance of these choices is especially evident when developing a Sinc-Galerkin ADI scheme [7]. It should be pointed out that conditioning problems are not unique to this spectral scheme. Canuto [2] and Deville and Mund [3] have implemented finite element preconditioners for their spectral methods applied to (1.2). The changes of variables represented below may be thought of as preconditioners.

$$
\begin{gathered}
\mathcal{L}u(x)\bar = - u(x) = f(x),0 < x < 1 \hfill \\
u(0) = u(1) = 0 \hfill \\
\end{gathered}
$$

(1.1)

$$
\begin{gathered}
\mathcal{L}u(x,y)\bar = - (\frac{{\partial ^2 }}
{{\partial x^2 }} + \frac{{\partial ^2 }}
{{\partial y^2 }})u(x,y) = f(x,y),(x,y) \in (0,1)^2 \hfill \\
u|\partial (0,2)^2 = 0 \hfill \\
\end{gathered}
$$

(1.2)

## Keywords

Linear System Condition Number Trial Function Double Precision Conditioning Problem
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- [1]K. L. Bowers and J. Lund. Numerical solution of singular Poisson problems via the Sinc-Galerkin method.
*SIAM J. Numer. Anal*,24(1):36–51, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [2]C. Canuto and P. Pietra. Boundary and interface conditons within a finite element preconditioner for spectral methods.
*Journal of**Comp*.*Phys*. ,91:310–343, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [3]M.O. Deville and E.H. Mund. Finite-element preconditioning for pseudospectral solutions of elliptic problems.
*SIAM J*.*Sci*.*Stat. Comput*. ,11(2):311–342, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [4]G.H. Golub and C.F. Van Loan.
*Matrix Computations*. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 2nd edition, 1989.Google Scholar - [5]J. Lund. Symmetrization of the Sinc-Galerkin method for boundary value problems.
*Math. Comp*. ,47:571–588, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [6]K. M. McArthur, K. L. Bowers, and J. Lund. The sinc method in multiple space dimensions: Model problems.
*Numer. Math*. ,56:789–816, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [7]K.M. McArthur. The Sinc-Galerkin ADI method for elliptic equations. preprint.Google Scholar
- [8]K.M. McArthur, R.C. Smith, K.L. Bowers, and J. Lund. The Sinc-Galerkin method for parameter-dependent self-adjoint problems.
*Appl. Math, and**Comp*. ,50(2 and 3):175–202, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [9]F. Stenger. A Sinc-Galerkin method of solution of boundary value problems.
*Math. Comp*. ,33:85–109, 1979.Google Scholar - [10]F. Stenger. Numerical methods based on Whittaker cardinal, or sinc functions.
*SIAM Review*,23(2):165–224, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

## Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1993