I am looking for a way to fit my experimental data by a theoretical model which is described by a non-linear differential equation.
Unfortunately this latter can only be solved numerically (by solving this second degree, non-linear differential equation).
I manage to solve the differential equation for a set of parameters using the ode45 Matlab solver but now I want to find the proper fit parameters of the model. Also, I may have to mention that my ode45 is initiated at z=zmax (max being large so I can assume it is infinity) by y(zmax)=y0 and yprime(zmax)=yprime0 and I solve backward (from zmax to z=0).
I am quite new to this kind of numerical problems, are there classical ways to solve such problems?
Does anyone knows if there is a Matlab procedure which would help me solve this? On which principles is it based/constructed? (if possible I'd like to know the theoretical trick to solve this problem in a smart way, not by trying all the possible sets of parameters which would be very time consuming (I have 5 fit parameters!).
Thank you for your precious help!
You have facy methods in the Optimization Toolbox. In case you don't have access to it, you could do it manually by:
Selecting a cost function between the experimental and model data. For example, mean-squared-error.
Doing heuristic optimization of the cost function. For example, Nelder-Mead method.
Related
My task is to model a certain physical problem and use matlab to solve it's differential equations. I made the model but it seems far more complex than what I've learned so far so I have no idea how to solve this.
The black color means it's a constant
I assume that by "solve" you seek a closed form solution of the form x(t) = ..., z(t) = ... Unforunately, it's very likely you cannot solve this system of differential equations. Only very specific canonical systems actually have a closed-form solution, and they are the most simple (few terms and dependent variables). See Wikipedia's entry for Ordinary Differential Equations, in particular the section Summary of exact solutions.
Nevertheless, the procedure for attempting to solve with Matlab's Symbolic Math Toolbox is described here.
If instead you were asking for numerical integration, then I will give you some pointers, but you must carry out the math:
Convert the second order system to a first order system by using a substitution w(t) = dx/dt, allowing you to replace the d2x/dt2 term by dw/dt. Example here.
Read the documentation for ode15i and implement your transformed model as an implicit differential equation system.
N.B. You must supply numerical values for your constants.
I'm using the MATLAB's function 'pdepe' to solve a problem with some partial differential equations, a parabolic one.
I need to know the kind of numerical method that function uses, 'cause I have to notify this in a report.
The description of the function in MathWorks is "Solve initial-boundary value problems for systems of parabolic and elliptic PDEs in one space variable and time". Is it a finite difference method?
Thanks for helping me.
Taken from the Matlab 2016b documentation for pdepe:
The time integration is done with ode15s. pdepe exploits the
capabilities of ode15s for solving the differential-algebraic
equations that arise when Equation 1-3 contains elliptic equations,
and for handling Jacobians with a specified sparsity pattern.
Also, from the ode15s documentation:
ode15s is a variable-step, variable-order (VSVO) solver based on the
numerical differentiation formulas (NDFs) of orders 1 to 5.
Optionally, it can use the backward differentiation formulas (BDFs,
also known as Gear's method) that are usually less efficient
As indicated by Alessandro Trigilio, ode15s is used to advance the solution forward in time. Exactly what the function is advancing in time is a semi-discrete, second-order Galerkin formulation for non-singular problems or a semi-discrete, second-order Petrov-Galerkin formulation for singular problems (polar or spherical meshes that include the origin). As such, the spatial discretization is finite element in nature.
How do i check if the ode is stiff or not? Unfortunately, my problem is large so I cannot run different ode matlab solvers and compare their finish time. I hope I can tell from the ode itself directly. What are some characteristics of a stiff ode?
Unfortunately it is extremly hard to tell if the ode is stiff or not without running some integration methods especially if it's a large problem.
You could try to reduce the problem to a simpler one, e.g. Taylor-expansion and only taking the first 2 or 3 terms into consideration. Solving this problem could give you a hint whether your problem is stiff or not.
Note that I assumed your problem would be continous. Then according to Weierstraß' approximation theorem a series of polynomials (your Taylor expansion) would converge uniformly to your problem. This means if the problem with taylor series is stiff your original problem might be too.
I wrote a code to solve a system using ode45 and ode15s in matlab. I am wondering if I can improve the speed of the code using multiple core (or parallel code) in my script.
Anyone have tried this ??
Thanks
No, you can't.
All numerical integrators, ode45 and friends included, use some form of iterative scheme to solve the user-implemented (coupled) non-linear (partial) differential equations.
Each new step in the iterative schemes of ode45/15s/.. (to compute the new state of the system) depends on the previous step (the old state of the system), therefore, these numerical integrators cannot be parallelized effectively.
The only speedup you can do that's likely to have a big impact is to optimize your implementation of the differential equation.
From my experience, the only way to use multiple cores for ODE suite solvers in MATLAB is to use "parfor loop" to start multiple computations together at the same time, your single computation not be any faster, but you can start many with different parameters and have multiple solutions after that long wait. So if you need to start ODE many times that might speed up your work.
To speed up one ODE function it also a good idea to play with RelTol and AbsTol settings (changes time form seconds to hours), using Jpattern option can also be very helpful (my almost tridiagonal pattern made it run twice as fast). If your differential equation is simple maybe try to compile it first, or at least vectorize (I used to write some part of code in Java and then point MATLAB to use compiled .class file). Obviously the length of your solution vector plays important role, so don't make it more than a few hounded.
I've got a problem with my equation that I try to solve numerically using both MATLAB and Symbolic Toolbox. I'm after several source pages of MATLAB help, picked up a few tricks and tried most of them, still without satisfying result.
My goal is to solve set of three non-polynomial equations with q1, q2 and q3 angles. Those variables represent joint angles in my industrial manipulator and what I'm trying to achieve is to solve inverse kinematics of this model. My set of equations looks like this: http://imgur.com/bU6XjNP
I'm solving it with
numeric::solve([z1,z2,z3], [q1=x1..x2,q2=x3..x4,q3=x5..x6], MultiSolutions)
Changing the xn constant according to my needs. Yet I still get some odd results, the q1 var is off by approximately 0.1 rad, q2 and q3 being off by ~0.01 rad. I don't have much experience with numeric solve, so I just need information, should it supposed to look like that?
And, if not, what valid option do you suggest I should take next? Maybe transforming this equation to polynomial, maybe using a different toolbox?
Or, if trying to do this in Matlab, how can you limit your solutions when using solve()? I'm thinking of an equivalent to Symbolic Toolbox's assume() and assumeAlso.
I would be grateful for your help.
The numerical solution of a system of nonlinear equations is generally taken as an iterative minimization process involving the minimization (i.e., finding the global minimum) of the norm of the difference of left and right hand sides of the equations. For example fsolve essentially uses Newton iterations. Those methods perform a "deterministic" optimization: they start from an initial guess and then move in the unknowns space essentially according to the opposite of the gradient until the solution is not found.
You then have two kinds of issues:
Local minima: the stopping rule of the iteration is related to the gradient of the functional. When the gradient becomes small, the iterations are stopped. But the gradient can become small in correspondence to local minima, besides the desired global one. When the initial guess is far from the actual solution, then you are stucked in a false solution.
Ill-conditioning: large variations of the unknowns can be reflected into large variations of the data. So, small numerical errors on data (for example, machine rounding) can lead to large variations of the unknowns.
Due to the above problems, the solution found by your numerical algorithm will be likely to differ (even relevantly) from the actual one.
I recommend that you make a consistency test by choosing a starting guess, for example when using fsolve, very close to the actual solution and verify that your final result is accurate. Then you will discover that, by making the initial guess more far away from the actual solution, your result will be likely to show some (even large) errors. Of course, the entity of the errors depend on the nature of the system of equations. In some lucky cases, those errors could keep also very small.