dolfin team mailing list archive

["N.A. Borggren" <question159192@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question #159192 on DOLFIN changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/dolfin/+question/159192

N.A. Borggren proposed the following answer:
Hello,
  I've been working on related Fokker Planck type problems (the 'adjoint' of what you wrote down) and have encountered this same phenomena.  I have not managed to find a way to get directly the steady state but perhaps you can learn from what I've tried.  The fastest way I've been able to converge to a steady state is by still solving in the time dependent way (like the advection/diffusion demo) but using an initial condition 'as close as possible' to the steady state.  For example obtaining an initial guess by histogramming a few of the corresponding dynamical system or langevin trajectories and solving poisson's equation gives an initial distribution that converges quite rapidly.  Also artificially increasing the diffusion (high temperature limit) can speed up the simulation and then you can turn it back down to the value of interest when it seems closer to converged. 
  I know those aren't the answers you were hoping for, but that is the best I've managed to work out so far.  Part of the issue, I believe, is the 'steady state' is, not necessarily the same for all initial conditions.  It is often the case that multiple initial conditions asymptotically convergence to the same steady state but that technically takes infinitely long.   The equation is still a linear equation, a unique initial condition gives a unique final condition, and two different initial conditions that seem 'converged' will actual differ a bit in the details so some tolerance would need to be defined and set to consider these two solutions identical.
  Also if the boundary conditions are at all absorbing then the steady state actually is the trivial solution unless there is an explicit driving force.  (take t to infinity in, say, Equation 2.40 Zwanzig, Nonequilibrium statistical mechanics).  So depending on your boundary condition dolfin and your form might actually be working properly.  
  I was hoping to avoid all that with a reflecting boundary condition case, (A_i * u)n_i + (d/dx_j (B^2_ij * u)n_i=0, on the mesh boundary with n_i the normal to the mesh.  This is how I keep the probability from going to zero in the time dependent case as well since it conserves the probability inside the mesh domain.  For the steady state I have also tried to at least avoid the trivial solution by forcing a normalization condition of 1 with a lagrange multiplier but haven't yet succeeded with that approach either.  The iterative method of finding a good guess from the dynamics for the initial condition and propagating that in time has been the fastest, albeit slightly unsatisfying method for me. 
  I think for these steady states, as well as the time dependent case, Fokker-Planck equations would work a lot better if one were able to take into account that we need only be concerned with positive functions and could restrict the finite elements used to insist on positivity of a function.  Are there strictly positive finite elements available or good ways to force the standard elements to stay positive?  It could be very useful here.  This has also been the hold up I've had in applying the fokker-planck equations in three dimensions which seems to quickly exacerbate this issue.
   Thanks,
     Nathan

-- 
You received this question notification because you are a member of
DOLFIN Team, which is an answer contact for DOLFIN.