Quartic nonpolynomial spline solution for solving twopoint boundary value problems by using Conjugate Gradient Iterative Method
Hynichearry Justine
,Jackel Vui Ling Chew
,Jumat Sulaiman
Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics 
Download Full Text 
View in HTML format 
Export citation 
@article{Justine_2017, doi = {10.17512/jamcm.2017.1.04}, url = {https://doi.org/10.17512/jamcm.2017.1.04}, year = 2017, publisher = {The Publishing Office of Czestochowa University of Technology}, volume = {16}, number = {1}, pages = {4150}, author = {Hynichearry Justine and Jackel Vui Ling Chew and Jumat Sulaiman}, title = {Quartic nonpolynomial spline solution for solving twopoint boundary value problems by using Conjugate Gradient Iterative Method}, journal = {Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics} }
TY  JOUR DO  10.17512/jamcm.2017.1.04 UR  https://doi.org/10.17512/jamcm.2017.1.04 TI  Quartic nonpolynomial spline solution for solving twopoint boundary value problems by using Conjugate Gradient Iterative Method T2  Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics JA  J Appl Math Comput Mech AU  Justine, Hynichearry AU  Chew, Jackel Vui Ling AU  Sulaiman, Jumat PY  2017 PB  The Publishing Office of Czestochowa University of Technology SP  41 EP  50 IS  1 VL  16 SN  22999965 SN  23530588 ER 
Justine, H., Chew, J., & Sulaiman, J. (2017). Quartic nonpolynomial spline solution for solving twopoint boundary value problems by using Conjugate Gradient Iterative Method. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics, 16(1), 4150. doi:10.17512/jamcm.2017.1.04
Justine, H., Chew, J. & Sulaiman, J., 2017. Quartic nonpolynomial spline solution for solving twopoint boundary value problems by using Conjugate Gradient Iterative Method. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics, 16(1), pp.4150. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17512/jamcm.2017.1.04
[1]H. Justine, J. Chew and J. Sulaiman, "Quartic nonpolynomial spline solution for solving twopoint boundary value problems by using Conjugate Gradient Iterative Method," Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 4150, 2017.
Justine, Hynichearry, Jackel Vui Ling Chew, and Jumat Sulaiman. "Quartic nonpolynomial spline solution for solving twopoint boundary value problems by using Conjugate Gradient Iterative Method." Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics 16.1 (2017): 4150. CrossRef. Web.
1. Justine H, Chew J, Sulaiman J. Quartic nonpolynomial spline solution for solving twopoint boundary value problems by using Conjugate Gradient Iterative Method. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics. The Publishing Office of Czestochowa University of Technology; 2017;16(1):4150. Available from: https://doi.org/10.17512/jamcm.2017.1.04
Justine, Hynichearry, Jackel Vui Ling Chew, and Jumat Sulaiman. "Quartic nonpolynomial spline solution for solving twopoint boundary value problems by using Conjugate Gradient Iterative Method." Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics 16, no. 1 (2017): 4150. doi:10.17512/jamcm.2017.1.04
QUARTIC NONPOLYNOMIAL SPLINE SOLUTION FOR SOLVING TWOPOINT BOUNDARY VALUE PROBLEMS BY USING CONJUGATE GRADIENT ITERATIVE METHOD
Hynichearry Justine, Jackel Vui Ling Chew, Jumat Sulaiman
Mathematics with Economics Programme,
University Malaysia Sabah
Sabah, Malaysia
cherryjust20@gmail.com, jackelchew93@gmail.com, jumat@ums.edu.my
Received: 23 November 2016; accepted:
10 February 2017
Abstract. Solving twopoint boundary value problems has become a scope of interest among many researchers due to its significant contributions in the field of science, engineering, and economics which is evidently apparent in many previous literary publications. This present paper aims to discretize the twopoint boundary value problems by using a quartic nonpolynomial spline before finally solving them iteratively with Conjugate Gradient (CG) method. Then, the performances of the proposed approach in terms of iteration number, execution time and maximum absolute error are compared with GaussSeidel (GS) and Successive OverRelaxation (SOR) iterative methods. Based on the performances analysis, the twopoint boundary value problems are found to have the most favorable results when solved using CG compared to GS and SOR methods.
MSC 2010: 34B05
Keywords: twopoint boundary value problems, quartic nonpolynomial spline, Conjugate Gradient, Successive OverRelaxation, GaussSeidel
1. Introduction
Numerical methods have numerous significances in the field of sciences, economics, and engineering, and one of them when it comes to the solution of twopoint boundary value problems which involve finding an approximate solution iteratively, as it will be timeconsuming to solve them with analytical method. Some of the contributions of numerical methods related to the twopoint boundary value problems include the modelling of chemical reactions and the modelling of heat transfer, such as in rocket thrust chamber liners and in the fuel elements for nuclear reactors as discussed by Ozisik [1]. On the other hand, Goffe [2] mentioned the modelling of the growth theory, capital theory, investment theory, resource economics and labor economics in the field of economics. Prior to these, many researchers had attempted to initiate different methods in order to accelerate the approximate solution when solving the problems and this can be abundantly found in previous literary publications. Some of the methods that were readily apparent are the NewtonEGMSOR method [3], the EADM method [4], the shooting method [5], the PTI method [6], the nonlinear shooting method [7], the mean weight method [8], the finite difference, the finite element and the finite volume method [9] and the spline method [10, 11]. Despite all these methods, the solution in this paper was given focus based on the discretization of the quartic nonpolynomial spline together with the Conjugate Gradient (CG) iterative method.
Moreover, there are many other iterative methods which are thoroughly discussed by Kelly [12], Burgerscentrum [13], Hestenes and Stiefel [14], Saad [15], Hackbush [16] and Young [17, 18]. According to Ibrahim and Abdullah [19], and Yousif and Evans [20], there are several numbers of the iterative methods family with a different concept, and they emphasized the concept of block iteration. In addition to that, UlIslam et al. [21], Ramadan et al. [22], Siddiqi et al. [23] have provided the basis for this paper at a different degree of splines to solve the twopoint boundary value problems. In regards to the advantages of the CG iterative method and the spline approach as highlighted in [14] and [2123] respectively, this present paper aims to develop a solution for the problems by using a quartic nonpolynomial spline together with the CG iterative method. As for comparison purposes, Successive OverRelaxation (SOR) and GaussSeidel (GS) were set as control methods so that the performances of the CG method can be determined in respect to its iteration number, execution time and maximum absolute error.
2. Twopoint boundary value problems
Generally, the twopoint boundary value problems can be expressed as Eq. (1) and subject to boundary conditions (2) as follows:
(1) 
(2) 
where and are known functions restricted by boundary and is a constant. The solution for problem (1) cannot be obtained through a random selection of functions and due to the restrictions held by the boundary conditions (2). Furthermore, the process for discretization of problem (1) is made simpler by assuming positive integer and letting the solution domain, be divided uniformly into a uniform separation of nodes set or subinterval, as shown in Figure 1. Then, the length of the uniform subintervals, can be defined as:
(3) 
Fig. 1. Distribution of node point for domain solution _{ }m = 8
Moreover, the solution domain in Figure 1 was used to develop a uniform grid of a/the network as shown in Figure 2 for the derivation of the spline function, and the grid points in the solution domain were labeled as with function denoted as The formulation and implementation of the GS, SOR and CG iterative method were then conducted based on the interior grid points until the convergence test is satisfied.
Fig. 2. Illustration of nonpolynomial spline function for domain solution _{ }m = 8
3. Quartic nonpolynomial spline approximation equation
The general form of the nonpolynomial spline can be expressed as follows:
(4) 
and it was used to discretize the problem (1) so that the approximation equation can be constructed as a system of linear equations in a matrix form. This discretization process was conducted by assuming as the exact solution for problem (1) and as the quartic nonpolynomial spline approximation to obtained from the mixed splines as shown in Figure 2 which passing through the points and . Based on Eq. (4), the quartic nonpolynomial spline can be expressed in as:
(5) 
where and are constants for and is a free parameter [19]. The function interpolates at the points by depending on and reducing to quartic spline in as
Then, in order to obtain the necessary conditions for all the constants and, the function has been satisfied at and at boundary conditions (2) and at the continuity of the common nodes at of first, second and third derivatives. Before deriving the expression for all the coefficients of (6) in terms of and we first define the function at second and fourth derivatives as:
(6) 
After performing a straightforward calculation, all the values (7) of constant and, were obtained as follows:
(7) 
where and
Now that all the values of constant and, were obtained, we then use the continuity conditions (2) of the quartic spline at its first and third derivatives at the point where the two quartics and join, and this relation can be written as:
, 
where the degree of the derivative is
Based on Eqs. (5) and (7), the relation at the first derivative (8) and the third derivative (9) can be expressed in following form:
(8) 
(9) 
Upon subtraction of Eqs. (8) and (9), it yields the following equation:

Then, a system of linear equations is constructed based on (10) in the following form:
(11) 
where
and
4. Algorithm of CG method
The CG iterative method was first discussed by Hestenes and Stiefel [14] as mentioned earlier, and this iterative method will converge in less than or equal to the size of the matrix itself in the absence of roundoff error, with the assumption that matrix in (11) is symmetric and positive definite. In fact, this method surpassed the Gauss elimination method. In addition to that, the CG method is much simpler to code when it comes to computer programming and requires less storage space due to its ability to maintain the particular matrix throughout the implementation and improvement which occur at each step of the estimations. In other words, the original data can be used to its maximum. Owing to these advantages of the CG method, the present paper aims to examine its performances in comparison with another two iterative methods which are Successive Over Relaxation (SOR) and GaussSeidel (GS) when solving the twopoint boundary value problems using the quartic nonpolynomial scheme.
By referring to (11), the CG method can be formulated by computing the sequence of vectors which are elements of that satisfy the following conditions
(12) 
and at the same time matrix is assumed as symmetrical matrix. As for method GS and SOR, the formulation begins by decomposing the matrix as
(13) 
where is a diagonal matrix, is a lower triangular matrix and is upper triangular matrix. Upon imposing (13) onto (11), the formulation of GS and SOR methods can be written as (14) and (15) respectively.
(14) 
(15) 
To facilitate the convergence rate of the SOR method, the value of the parameter must be obtained first through several computer programs in the range of The optimal value of the parameter is selected based on the smallest iterations number. As for the GS method, the value of the parameter is equal to one if we reduce (14) to the GS method. Since both the GS and SOR methods are implemented for comparison purpose only, therefore only the algorithm for the CG method is presented.
The Algorithm of CG Method
i. Initialize .
ii. Compute the residual and choose a direction of .
iii. Obtain the new , and the direction then compute the new estimate and its residual by using the formulas
, ,
iv. Next find the direction of by using the formulas and repeat step (iii)
where
v. Check the convergence. If yes, go to step (vi). Otherwise go back to step (iii).
vi. Display the approximate solutions.
4. Numerical experiment
In order to verify the performances of the CG iterative method, a numerical experiment is conducted by solving the following twopoint boundary value problems [8].
Problem 1
(16) 
given that the exact solution for problem (16) is
Problem 2
(17) 
with its exact solution given by
The analysis and results of the performances in terms of iterations number (Iter), execution time (Second) and maximum absolute error (MAE) for Problem 1 and Problem 2 are presented and discussed in the next section.
5. Result and discussion
Based on the numerical experiment, the performances results of Problem 1 and Problem 2 are successfully tabulated in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Both tables show that as the matrix sizes increasing, the iterations number generated by the three iterative methods are also increasing. This is due to the accumulated roundoff error that occurred at every iteration. However, it can be observed that the CG iterative method performs better than SOR and GS iterative methods as the matrix sizes are being incremented, and this is evidently presented through the difference of iterations number, execution time and maximum absolute error at different matrix sizes (128, 256, 512, 1024 and 2048).
Other than lesser iterations number, the CG iterative method also requires shorter execution time in order to iterate and converge to the exact solution, when solving the twopoint boundary value problems. In fact, by going down the tables, the performances of the CG iterative method can be seen improving over SOR and GS methods for different matrix sizes especially the accuracy which given by maximum absolute error. This indicates that CG iterative method can cope with the accumulated roundoff error better than SOR and GS method when solving the twopoint boundary value problems together with the quartic nonpolynomial spline scheme. Hence, it can be stated that CG iterative method has better performances compared to SOR and GS iterative methods when solving the problems.
Table 1
Comparison of GS, SOR and CG iterative methods in terms of iterations number (Iter), execution time (Seconds) and maximum absolute errors (MAE) for Problem 1
Matrix Sizes Method 
128 
256 
512 
1024 
2048 
Iterations Number 

GS SOR CG 
18173 382 65 
66139 807 129 
238353 1438 257 
848604 2821 513 
2975185 5367 1025 
Execution Time 

GS SOR CG 
14.40 1.52 0.16 
49.09 1.45 0.54 
168.88 3.95 1.44 
662.96 6.32 2.31 
83318.09 8.75 2.62 
Maximum Absolute Error 

GS SOR CG 
1.1788e07 4.0171e10 1.1833e10 
4.7242e07 5.8395e09 7.2046e12 
1.8899e06 4.3379e09 1.8359e13 
7.5601e06 9.6408e09 2.1296e12 
3.0241e05 1.8447e08 8.1399e12 
Table 2
Comparison of GS, SOR and CG iterative methods in terms of iterations number (Iter), execution time (Seconds) and maximum absolute errors (MAE) for Problem 2
Matrix Sizes Method 
128 
256 
512 
1024 
2048 
Iterations Number 

GS SOR CG 
25950 735 128 
94591 976 256 
341534 2703 512 
1218827 5174 1024 
4286118 9181 2048 
Execution Time 

GS SOR CG 
37.06 1.68 0.57 
88.40 2.59 1.14 
325.63 4.12 1.60 
1220.80 7.35 1.99 
6231.12 13.76 4.21 
Maximum Absolute Error 

GS SOR CG 
1.6485e07 2.6789e09 1.0363e09 
6.6388e07 6.9686e10 6.4801e11 
2.6560e06 1.4228e08 4.1241e12 
1.0624e05 2.8422e08 1.1072e13 
4.2498e05 5.1772e08 5.3167e12 
6. Conclusion
In conclusion, an approximate equation to solve twopoint boundary value problems was successfully developed based on a quartic nonpolynomial spline so that a system of linear equations can be constructed. Then, this linear system was solved by using three iterative methods which are the GS, SOR and CG iterative methods. Based on the results of performances experiment, the CG method was found to be superior compared to the GS and SOR method, and it is evidently proven through the comparison shown by the CG method in terms of iterations number, execution time and maximum absolute error at different respective matrix sizes. Therefore, it can be summarized that, the approximate solution obtained from the discretization of twopoint boundary value problems by using the quartic non polynomial scheme to form a linear system is best solved with the CG iterative method.
References
[1] Ozışık M.N., Boundary value problems of heat conduction, Courier Corporation, 1989.
[2] Goffe W.L., A user’s guide to the numerical solution of twopoint boundary value problems arising in continuous time dynamic economic models, Computational Economics 1993, 6(34), 249255.
[3] Chew J.V., Sulaiman J., Implicit solution of 1D nonlinear porous medium equation using the fourpoint NewtonEGMSOR iterative method, Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics 2016, 15(2), 1121.
[4] Jang B., Twopoint boundary value problems by the extended Adomian decomposition method, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 2008, 219(1), 253262.
[5] Kong D.X., Sun Q.Y., Twopoint boundary value problems and exact controllability for several kinds of linear and nonlinear wave equations, In Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2011, 290(1), 012008. IOP Publishing.
[6] Chen B., Tong L., Gu Y., Precise time integration for linear twopoint boundary value problems, Applied Mathematics and Computation 2006, 175(1), 182211.
[7] Ha S.N., A nonlinear shooting method for twopoint boundary value problems, Computers & Mathematics with Applications 2001, 42(10), 14111420.
[8] Mohsen A., ElGamel M., On the Galerkin and collocation methods for twopoint boundary value problems using sinc bases, Computers & Mathematics with Applications 2008, 56(4), 930941.
[9] Fang Q., Tsuchiya T., Yamamoto T., Finite difference, finite element and finite volume methods applied to twopoint boundary value problems, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 2002, 139(1), 919.
[10] Albasiny E.L., Hoskins W.D., Cubic spline solutions to twopoint boundary value problems, The Computer Journal 1969, 12(2), 151153.
[11] Ramadan M.A., Lashien I.F., Zahra W.K., Quintic nonpolynomial spline solutions for fourth order twopoint boundary value problem, Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation 2009, 14(4), 11051114.
[12] Kelley C.T., Iterative Methods for Linear and Nonlinear Equations, SIAM, Philadelphia 1995.
[13] Beauwens R., Iterative solution methods, Applied Numerical Mathematics 2004, 51(4), 437450.
[14] Hestenes M.R., Stiefel E., Methods of conjugate gradients for solving linear systems, NBS 1952, 49, 1.
[15] Saad Y., Iterative methods for sparse linear systems, SIAM, 2003.
[16] Hackbusch W., Iterative Solution of Large Sparse Systems of Equations, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.
[17] Young D.M., Iterative solution of large linear systems, Elsevier, 2014.
[18] Young D.M., Seconddegree iterative methods for the solution of large linear systems, Journal of Approximation Theory 1972, 5(2),137148.
[19] Abdullah A.R., Ibrahim A., Solving the twodimensional diffusionconvection equation by the four point explicit decoupled group (edg) iterative method, International Journal of Computer Mathematics 1995, 58(12), 6171.
[20] Evans D.J., Yousif W.S., The implementation of the explicit block iterative methods on the balance 8000 parallel computer, Parallel Computing 1990, 16(1), 8197.
[21] Islam S.U., Tirmizi I.A., A smooth approximation for the solution of special nonlinear thirdorder boundaryvalue problems based on nonpolynomial splines, International Journal of Computer Mathematics 2006, 83(4), 397407.
[22] Ramadan M.A., Lashien I.F., Zahra W.K., Polynomial and nonpolynomial spline approaches to the numerical solution of second order boundary value problems, Applied Mathematics and Computation 2007, 184(2), 476484.
[23] Siddiqi S.S., Akram G., Solution of fifth order boundary value problems using nonpolynomial spline technique, Applied Mathematics and Computation 2006, 175(2), 15741581.