Abstract
This paper is concerned with a posteriori error bounds for linear transport equations and related questions of contriving corresponding adaptive solution strategies in the context of Discontinuous Petrov Galerkin schemes. After indicating our motivation for this investigation in a wider context the first major part of the paper is devoted to the derivation and analysis of a posteriori error bounds that, under mild conditions on variable convection fields, are efficient and, modulo a data-oscillation term, reliable. In particular, it is shown that these error estimators are computed at a cost that stays uniformly proportional to the problem size. The remaining part of the paper is then concerned with the question whether typical bulk criteria known from adaptive strategies for elliptic problems entail a fixed error reduction rate also in the context of transport equations. This turns out to be significantly more difficult than for elliptic problems and at this point we can give a complete affirmative answer for a single spatial dimension. For the general multidimensional case we provide partial results which we find of interest in their own right. An essential distinction from known concepts is that global arguments enter the issue of error reduction. An important ingredient of the underlying analysis, which is perhaps interesting in its own right, is to relate the derived error indicators to the residuals that naturally arise in related least squares formulations. This reveals a close interrelation between both settings regarding error reduction in the context of adaptive refinements.
Funding source: National Science Foundation
Award Identifier / Grant number: DMS-1720297
Funding statement: Both authors have been supported in part by NSF Grant DMS-1720297. In addition, the first author has been supported in part by the DFG Research Group 1779, and by the SmartState and Williams–Hedberg Foundation.
References
[1] P. Binev, W. Dahmen and R. DeVore, Adaptive finite element methods with convergence rates, Numer. Math. 97 (2004), 219–268. 10.21236/ADA640658Search in Google Scholar
[2] D. Broersen, W. Dahmen and R. P. Stevenson, On the stability of DPG formulations of transport equations, Math. Comp. 87 (2018), no. 311, 1051–1082. 10.1090/mcom/3242Search in Google Scholar
[3]
J. H. Bramble and J. Xu,
Some estimates for a weighted
[4] C. Carstensen, L. Demkowicz and J. Gopalakrishnan, Breaking spaces and forms for the DPG method and applications including Maxwell equations, Comput. Math. Appl. 72 (2016), no. 3, 494–522. 10.1016/j.camwa.2016.05.004Search in Google Scholar
[5] A. Cohen, W. Dahmen and G. Welper, Adaptivity and variational stabilization for convection-diffusion equations, ESAIM Math. Model. Numer. Anal. 46 (2012), no. 5, 1247–1273. 10.1051/m2an/2012003Search in Google Scholar
[6] W. Dahmen, C. Huang, C. Schwab and G. Welper, Adaptive Petrov–Galerkin methods for first order transport equations, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 50 (2012), no. 5, 2420–2445. 10.1137/110823158Search in Google Scholar
[7] J. Gopalakrishnan and W. Qiu, An analysis of the practical DPG method, Math. Comp. 83 (2014), no. 286, 537–552. 10.1090/S0025-5718-2013-02721-4Search in Google Scholar
[8] R. H. Nochetto, K. G. Siebert and A. Veeser, Theory of adaptive finite element methods: An introduction, Multiscale, Nonlinear and Adaptive Approximation, Springer, Berlin (2009), 409–542. 10.1007/978-3-642-03413-8_12Search in Google Scholar
[9] R. P. Stevenson, Optimality of a standard adaptive finite element method, Found. Comput. Math. 7 (2007), no. 2, 245–269. 10.1007/s10208-005-0183-0Search in Google Scholar
[10] R. Verfürth, A Review of A Posteriori Error Estimation and Adaptive Mesh-Refinement Techniques, Wiley–Teubner, Chichester, 1996. Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston