Finite difference approximations for measure-valued solutions of a hierarchicallysize-structured population model
-
1.
Department of Mathematics, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, Lafayette, LA 70504-1010
-
2.
Department of Mathematics, Box 8205, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-8205
-
Received:
01 April 2014
Accepted:
29 June 2018
Published:
01 December 2014
-
-
MSC :
Primary: 35A05, 35D05, 35F25, 35L67, 92D25.
-
-
We study a quasilinear hierarchically size-structured population modelpresented in [4]. In this model the growth, mortality andreproduction rates are assumed to depend on a function of thepopulation density. In [4] we showed that solutions to thismodel can become singular (measure-valued) in finite time even ifall the individual parameters are smooth. Therefore, in this paperwe develop a first order finite difference scheme to compute thesemeasure-valued solutions. Convergence analysis for this method isprovided. We also develop a high resolution second order scheme tocompute the measure-valued solution of the model and perform a comparative study between thetwo schemes.
Citation: Azmy S. Ackleh, Vinodh K. Chellamuthu, Kazufumi Ito. Finite difference approximations for measure-valued solutions of a hierarchicallysize-structured population model[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2015, 12(2): 233-258. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015.12.233
-
Abstract
We study a quasilinear hierarchically size-structured population modelpresented in [4]. In this model the growth, mortality andreproduction rates are assumed to depend on a function of thepopulation density. In [4] we showed that solutions to thismodel can become singular (measure-valued) in finite time even ifall the individual parameters are smooth. Therefore, in this paperwe develop a first order finite difference scheme to compute thesemeasure-valued solutions. Convergence analysis for this method isprovided. We also develop a high resolution second order scheme tocompute the measure-valued solution of the model and perform a comparative study between thetwo schemes.
References
[1]
|
Theor. Popul. Biol., 71 (2007), 290-300.
|
[2]
|
Appl. Math. Optim., 51 (2005), 35-59.
|
[3]
|
J. Num. Funct. Anal. Optimization, 18 (1997), 865-884.
|
[4]
|
J. Differential Equations, 217 (2005), 431-455.
|
[5]
|
Dynamic Systems Appl., 9 (2000), 527-539.
|
[6]
|
J. Math. Biol., 35 (1997), 967-987.
|
[7]
|
J. Differetial Equations, 252 (2012), 3245-3277.
|
[8]
|
Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 24 (2014), 2171-2197.
|
[9]
|
J. Math. Biol., 32 (1994), 705-729.
|
[10]
|
J. Math. Biol., 43 (2001), 157-189.
|
[11]
|
Num. Meth. Partial Diff. Eq., 30 (2014), 1797-1820.
|
[12]
|
J. Differential Equations, 248 (2010), 2703-2735.
|
[13]
|
J. Math. Biol., 34 (1996), 755-772.
|
[14]
|
Natural Resource Modeling, 14 (2001), 45-70.
|
[15]
|
Mat. Sb., 123 (1970), 228-255; English transl. in Math. USSR Sb., 10 (1970), 217-273.
|
[16]
|
SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 45 (2007), 352-370.
|
[17]
|
J. Comput. Phys., 77 (1988), 439-471.
|
[18]
|
Springer-Verlag, New York, 1994.
|
-
-
-
-