
In this paper we introduce a natural compactification of a left (right) invariant affine control system on a semi-simple Lie group G in which the control functions belong to the Lie algebra of a compact Lie subgroup K of G and we investigate conditions under which the time optimal solutions of this compactified system are "approximately" time optimal for the original system. The basic ideas go back to the papers of R.W. Brockett and his collaborators in their studies of time optimal transfer in quantum control ([
In the second part of the paper we applied our results to the quantum systems known as Icing n-chains (introduced in [
Citation: Velimir Jurdjevic. Time optimal problems on Lie groups and applications to quantum control[J]. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2024, 16(2): 345-387. doi: 10.3934/cam.2024017
[1] | Zihan Yue, Wei Jiang, Boying Wu, Biao Zhang . A meshless method based on the Laplace transform for multi-term time-space fractional diffusion equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 7040-7062. doi: 10.3934/math.2024343 |
[2] | Farman Ali Shah, Kamran, Zareen A Khan, Fatima Azmi, Nabil Mlaiki . A hybrid collocation method for the approximation of 2D time fractional diffusion-wave equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 27122-27149. doi: 10.3934/math.20241319 |
[3] | Xiangmei Li, Kamran, Absar Ul Haq, Xiujun Zhang . Numerical solution of the linear time fractional Klein-Gordon equation using transform based localized RBF method and quadrature. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 5287-5308. doi: 10.3934/math.2020339 |
[4] | Chao Wang, Fajie Wang, Yanpeng Gong . Analysis of 2D heat conduction in nonlinear functionally graded materials using a local semi-analytical meshless method. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(11): 12599-12618. doi: 10.3934/math.2021726 |
[5] | Fouad Mohammad Salama, Nur Nadiah Abd Hamid, Norhashidah Hj. Mohd Ali, Umair Ali . An efficient modified hybrid explicit group iterative method for the time-fractional diffusion equation in two space dimensions. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2370-2392. doi: 10.3934/math.2022134 |
[6] | Xiangyun Qiu, Xingxing Yue . Solving time fractional partial differential equations with variable coefficients using a spatio-temporal meshless method. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 27150-27166. doi: 10.3934/math.20241320 |
[7] | Bin Fan . Efficient numerical method for multi-term time-fractional diffusion equations with Caputo-Fabrizio derivatives. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 7293-7320. doi: 10.3934/math.2024354 |
[8] | Bin He . Developing a leap-frog meshless methods with radial basis functions for modeling of electromagnetic concentrator. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 17133-17149. doi: 10.3934/math.2022943 |
[9] | Hijaz Ahmad, Muhammad Nawaz Khan, Imtiaz Ahmad, Mohamed Omri, Maged F. Alotaibi . A meshless method for numerical solutions of linear and nonlinear time-fractional Black-Scholes models. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 19677-19698. doi: 10.3934/math.20231003 |
[10] | Sayed Saifullah, Amir Ali, Zareen A. Khan . Analysis of nonlinear time-fractional Klein-Gordon equation with power law kernel. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 5275-5290. doi: 10.3934/math.2022293 |
In this paper we introduce a natural compactification of a left (right) invariant affine control system on a semi-simple Lie group G in which the control functions belong to the Lie algebra of a compact Lie subgroup K of G and we investigate conditions under which the time optimal solutions of this compactified system are "approximately" time optimal for the original system. The basic ideas go back to the papers of R.W. Brockett and his collaborators in their studies of time optimal transfer in quantum control ([
In the second part of the paper we applied our results to the quantum systems known as Icing n-chains (introduced in [
Recently, partial differential equations (PDEs) with fractional derivatives have gained significant attention of the research community in applied sciences and engineering. Such equations are encountered in various applications (continuum mechanics, gas dynamics, hydrodynamics, heat and mass transfer, wave theory, acoustics, multiphase flows, chemical engineering, etc.). Numerous phenomenon in Chemistry, Physics, Biology, Finance, Economics and other relevant fields can be modelled using PDEs of fractional order [1,2,3,4,5]. In literature a significant theoretical work on the explicit solution of fractional order differential equations can be found [6,7] and there references. Since the explicit solutions can be obtained for special cases and most of the time the exact/analytical solutions are cumbersome for differential equations of non-integer order, therefore an alternative way is to find the solutions numerically. Various computational methods have been developed for approximation of differential equations of fractional order. The authors in [8], for example, have analyzed the implicit finite difference method and proved its unconditional convergence and stability. In [9] approximate solution of fractional diffusion equation is obtained via compact finite difference scheme. Liu et al.[10] studied the sub-diffusion equation having non-linear source term using analytical and numerical techniques. In [11] a numerical scheme for the solution of turbulent Riesz type diffusion equation is presented. The authors in [12] have solved diffusion-wave equations of fractional order using a compact finite difference method which is based on its equivalent integro-differential form. Garg et al.[13] utilized the matrix method for approximation of space-time wave-diffusion equation of non-integer order. In [14] the authors solved multi-term wave-diffusion equation of fractional order via Galerkin spectral method and a high order difference scheme. Two finite difference methods for approximating wave-diffusion equations are proposed in [15]. Bhrawy et al. [16] utilized Jacobi operational matrix based spectral tau algorithm for numerical solution of diffusion-wave equation of non-integer order. In [4] the authors proposed numerical schemes for approximating the multi-term wave-diffusion equation. The Legendre wavelets scheme for diffusion wave equations is proposed in [17]. The authors [18] presented a numerical scheme which is based on alternating direction implicit method and compact difference method for 2-D wave-diffusion equations. Similarly a compact difference scheme [19] is utilized for approximation of 1-D and 2-D diffusion-wave equations. Yang et al. [20] proposed a fractional multi-step method for the approximation of wave-diffusion equation of non-integer order. A spectral collocation method and its convergence analysis are presented in [21] for fractional wave-diffusion equation.
Since all these methods are mesh dependent and in modern problems these methods have been facing difficulties due to complicated geometries. Meshfree methods, as an alternative numerical method have attracted the researchers. Some meshless methods have been devoloped such as element-free Galerkin method(EFG)[22], reproducing kernel particle method (RKPM)[23], singular boundary method [24], the boundary particle method [25], Local radial point interpolation method (MLRPI) [26] and so on.
Numerous meshless methods have been developed for the approximation of fractional PDEs. Dehghan et al. [27] analyzed a meshless scheme for approximation of diffusion-wave equation of non-integer order and proved its stability and convergence. In [28] the authors presented an implicit meshless scheme for approximation of anomalous sub-diffusion equation. Diffusion equations of fractional orders are apprximated via RBF based implicit meshless method in [29]. Hosseini et al. [26] developed a local radial point interpolation meshless method based on the Galerkin weak form for numerical solution of wave-diffusion equation of non integer order. In [30] the authors approximated distributed order diffusion-wave equation of fractional order using meshless method. The authors in [31] proposed a meshless point collocation method for approximation of 2−D multi-term wave-diffusion equations. In [32] the authors proposed a local meshless method for time fractional diffusion-wave equation. Kansa method [33] is utilized for numerical solution of fractional diffusion equations. Zhuang et al. [34] proposed an implicit MLS meshless method for time fractional advection diffusion equation. The numerical solution of 2D wave-diffusion equation is studied in [35] using implicit MLS meshless method. The mentioned methods are meshfree time stepping methods and these methods faces stability restriction in time, and in these methods for convergence a very small step size is required. To overcome the issue of time instability some transformations may be used.
In literature some valuable work is available on resolving the problem of time instability. The researchers have coupled the Laplace transform with other well known numerical methods. For example the Laplace transform with Kansa method [33,36], finite element method [37,38], finite difference method [39], RBF method on unit sphere [40] and the references therein. In the present work we have coupled the Laplace transform with local meshless method for approximating the solution of the multi-term diffusion wave equation of fractional order.
In our numerical scheme we transform the multi-term time fractional wave-diffusion equation to a time independent problem with Laplace transformation. The reduced problem is then approximated using local meshless method in Laplace space. Finally the solution of the original problem is obtained using contour integration. We apply the proposed method to multi-term fractional wave-diffusion equation of the form [14]
Pα,α1,α2,...,αm(Dτ)U(χ,τ)=KLU(χ,τ)+f(χ,τ),forχ∈Ω,K∈Rτ>0, | (2.1) |
where
Pα,α1,α2,...,αm(Dτ)=Dατ+m∑j=1djDαjτ, |
1<αm<...<α1<α<2, and dj≥0,j=1,2,...,m,m∈N are constants. Dαjτ is a Caputo derivative of order αj defined by
Dαjτf(τ)=1Γ(n−αj)∫τaf(n)(ν)dν(τ−ν)αj+1−n,forn−1<αj<n,n∈N, | (2.2) |
also for n=2, we have
Dαjτf(τ)=1Γ(n−αj)∫τa∂2f(ν)∂ν2dν(τ−ν)αj−1,forαj∈(1,2). | (2.3) |
The initial conditions for the above Eq (2.1) are
U(χ,0)=U0(χ),∂U(χ,0)∂τ=U1(χ). | (2.4) |
and the boundary conditions are
BU(χ,τ)=q(χ,τ),χ∈∂Ω, | (2.5) |
where L is the governing linear differential operator, and B is the boundary differential operator. By applying the Laplace transformation to Eq (2.1), we get
ˆU(χ,s)=W(s;L)ˆg(χ,s), | (2.6) |
where
W(s;L)=(sαI+sα1I+...+sαmI−KL)−1, |
and
ˆg(χ,s)=sα−1U0(χ)+sα−2U1(χ)+sα1−1U0(χ)+sα1−2U1(χ)+...+sαm−1U0(χ)+sαm−2U1(χ)+ˆf(χ,s). |
Similarly applying the Laplace transform to (2.5), we get
BˆU(χ,s)=ˆq(χ,s), | (2.7) |
Hence, the system of time-independent equations is obtained as
ˆU(χ,s)=W(s;L)ˆg(χ,s), | (2.8) |
BˆU(χ,s)=ˆq(χ,s), | (2.9) |
In our method first we represent the solution U(χ,τ) of the original problem (2.1) as a contour integral
U(χ,τ)=12πi∫ΓesτˆU(χ,s)ds, | (2.10) |
where, for Res≥ω with ω appropriately large, and Γ is an initially appropriately chosen line Γ0 perpendicular to the real axis in the complex plane, with Ims→±∞. The integral (2.10) is just the inverse transform of ˆU(χ,τ), with the condition that ˆU(χ,τ) must be analytic to the right of Γ0. To make sure the contour of integration remains in the domain of analyticity of ˆU(χ,τ), we select Γ as a deformed contour in the set ΣΥϕ={s≠0:|args|<ϕ}∪{0}, which behaves as a pair of asymptotes in the left half plane, with Res→−∞ when Ims→±∞, which force esτ to decay towards both ends of Γ. In our work we have used two types of contours, the first contour is the hyperbolic contour Γ1 due to [38] with parametric representation
s(ξ)=Υ+ℶ(1−sin(η−ιξ)),ξ∈R,(Γ1) | (2.11) |
where,
ℶ>0,0<η<ϕ−π2,andΥ>0. | (2.12) |
By writing s=x+ιy, we observe that Γ1 is the left branch of the hyperbola
(x−Υ−ℶℶsinη)2−(yℶcosη)2=1, | (2.13) |
the asymptotes for (2.13) are y=±(x−Υ−ℶ)cotη, and x-intercept at s=Υ+ℶ(1−sinη). The condition (2.12) confirms that Γ1 lies in the sector ΣΥϕ=Υ+Σϕ⊂Σϕ, and grows into the left half plane. From (2.11) and (2.10), we have the following integral
U(χ,τ)=12πi∫∞−∞es(ξ)τˆU(χ,s(ξ))ˊs(ξ)dξ. | (2.14) |
Finally to approximate Eq (2.14), the trapezoidal rule with step k is used as
Uk(χ,τ)=k2πiM∑j=−MesjτˆU(χ,sj)ˊsj,forξj=jk,sj=s(ξj),s′j=s′(ξj). | (2.15) |
The second contour employed in this work is the Talbot's contour [41], though ignored by many researchers, yet it is one of the best method for numerical inverting the Laplace transform [42]. The authors in [43] have optimized the Talbot's contour for approximating the solution of parabolic PDEs. Other works on Talbot's method can be found in [44,45] and there references. In our work we have employed the improved Talbot's method [46] for numerical inversion of Laplace transform. The Talbot's contour has parametric representation of the form
s(ξ)=Mτθ(ξ),θ(ξ)=−σ+μξcot(γξ)+νιξ,−π≤ξ≤π,(Γ2) | (2.16) |
where the parameters σ,μ,ν, and γ are to be specified by the user. From (2.16) and (2.10) we have
U(χ,τ)=12πi∫π−πes(ξ)τˆU(χ,s(ξ))ˊs(ξ)dξ. | (2.17) |
We use M-panel mid-point rule with uniform spacing k=2πM, to approximate the integral (2.17) as
Uk(χ,τ)=1MiM∑j=1esjτˆU(χ,sj)ˊsj,forξj=−π+(j−12)k,sj=s(ξj),s′j=s′(ξj). | (2.18) |
To obtain the solution Uk(χ,τ), first we must solve system of 2M+1 equations given in (2.8) and (2.9) for quadrature points sj,|j|≤M. For this purpose the local meshless method is used to discretize operators L,B.
Given a set of points {χi}Ni=1inRd,whered≥1 the approximate function for ˆU(χ) using local meshless method has the form,
ˆU(χi)=∑χj∈Ωiλijϕ(‖χi−χij‖), | (2.19) |
where λi={λij}nj=1 is the expansion coefficients vector, ϕ(r) is a kernel function, r=‖χi−χj‖ is the distance between the centers χi and χj. Ω, and Ωi are global domain and local domains respectively. The sub-domain Ωi contains the center χi, and around it, its n neighboring centers. Thus we obtain n×n linear systems
(ˆU(χi1)ˆU(χi2)...ˆU(χin))=(ϕ(‖χi1−χi1‖)ϕ(‖χi1−χi2‖)...ϕ(‖χi1−χin‖)ϕ(‖χi2−χi1‖)ϕ(‖χi2−χi2‖)...ϕ(‖χi2−χin‖)............ϕ(‖χin−χi1‖)ϕ(‖χin−χi2‖)...ϕ(‖χin−χin‖))(λi1λi2...λin),i=1,2,...,N, | (2.20) |
which can be written as,
ˆUi=Φiλi,1≤i≤N, | (2.21) |
the matrix Φi contains elements in the form bikj=ϕ(‖χik−χij‖),whereχik,χij∈Ωi, the unknowns λi={λij:j=1,...,n} are obtained by solving each of the N systems in (2.21). For the differential operator L we have the form,
LˆU(χi)=∑χj∈ΩiλijLϕ(‖χi−χij‖), | (2.22) |
the above Eq (2.22) can be expressed as a dot product
LˆU(χi)=λi⋅νi, | (2.23) |
where νi is a n-row vector and λi is a n-column vector, entries of the n-column vector νi are given as
νi=Lϕ(‖χi−χij‖),χij∈Ωi, | (2.24) |
eliminating the co efficient λi from (2.21), and (2.23) we have the following expression
LˆU(χi)=νi(Φi)−1ˆUi=ϖiˆUi | (2.25) |
where,
ϖi=νi(Φi)−1, | (2.26) |
thus at each node χi the approximation of the operator L via local meshless method is given as
LˆU≡DˆU, | (2.27) |
In (2.27) D is a sparse differentiation matrix obtained via local meshless method as an approximation to L. The matrix D has order N×N, it has n non-zero entries, and N−n zero entries, where N is number of centers in global domain, and n is the number of centers in local domain. The boundary operator B can be discretized in similar way.
In order to solve the multi-term time fractional diffusion wave equation using our proposed method, the local meshless method and Laplace transformation is used. In our numerical scheme first the Laplace transform is applied to time dependent equation which eliminates the time variable, and this process causes no error. Then the local meshless method is utilized for approximating time independent equation. The error estimate for local meshless method is of order O(η1ϵh), 0<η<1, ϵ is the shape parameter and h is the fill distance. In the process of approximating the integrals (2.14) and (2.17) convergence is achieved at different rates depending on the paths Γ1, and Γ2. In approximating the integrals (2.14) and (2.17) the convergence order rely upon on the step k of the quadrature rule and the time domain [t0,T] for Γ1. The proof for the order of quadrature error for the path Γ1 is given in the next theorem.
Theorem 3.1 ([38], Theorem 2.1). Let U(χ,τ) be the solution of (2.1) with ˆf(χ,τ) analytic in ΣΥϕ. Let Γ⊂Ωr⊂ΣΥϕ, and define b>0 by coshb=1θτ1sin(η), where τ1=t0T, 0<τ0<T, 0<θ<1.0 and let ℶ=θ¯rMbT. Then for Eq (2.15), with k=bM≤¯rlog2, we have |U(χ,τ)−Uk(χ,τ)|≤CQeΥτ1l(ρrM)e−μM(‖U0‖+‖ˆf(χ,τ)‖ΣΥϕ), for μ=¯r(1−θ)b, ρr=θ¯rτ1sin(η−r1)b, ¯r=2πr1, r1>0, τ0≤τ≤T, C=Cη,r1,β, and l(x)=max(1,log(1x)). Hence the error estimate for the proposed scheme is
errorest(Γ1)=|U(χ,τ)−Uk(χ,τ)|=O(l(ρrM)e−μM). |
The authors in [46] derived the optimal values of the parameters for the Talbot's contour (Γ2) defined in (2.16) as given below
σ=0.6122,μ=0.5017,ν=0.2645,andγ=0.6407, |
with corresponding error estimate as
errorest(Γ2)=|U(χ,τ)−Uk(χ,τ)|=O(e−1.358M). |
To investigate the stability of the systems (2.8) and (2.9), we represent the system in discrete form as
MˆU=b, | (4.1) |
the matrix MN×N is sparse matrix obtained using local meshless method. For the system (4.1) the constant of stability is defined as
C=sup | (4.2) |
for any discrete norm defined on the constant is finite. From (4.2) we may write
(4.3) |
Similarly for the pseudoinverse of , we can write
(4.4) |
Thus we have
(4.5) |
We can see that Eqs (4.3) and (4.5) confirms the bounds for the stability constant . Calculating the pseudoinverse for approximating the system (4.1) numerically be quite expansive computationally, but it confirms the stability. The MATLAB's function condest can be used to estimate in case of square systems, thus we have
(4.6) |
This work well with less number of computations for our sparse differentiation matrix . Figure 1 shows the bounds for the constant of our system (2.8) and (2.9) for Problem 1 using the Talbot's contour . Selecting , , , and at , we have It is observed that the upper and lower bounds for the stability constant are very small numbers, which guarantees that the proposed local meshless scheme is stable.
The numerical examples are given to validate our proposed Laplace transform based local meshless scheme. In our computations we have considered different and linear multi term wave-diffusion equations. In our numerical examples we have utilized the multi-quadrics(MQ) kernel function = . We have used the uncertainty principal due to [47] for optimization of the shape parameter. The accuracy of the method is measured using error defined by
is used. Here and are the numerical and exact solutions respectively.
In the first test problem we consider the following linear fractional equation
(5.1) |
where
The exact solution of the problem is
The boundary and initial conditions are
(5.2) |
and
(5.3) |
The points along the hyperbolic contour are calculated using the statement and along Talbot's contour using the relation The parameters used in our computations for the contour are The results obtained for the parameters and along the contour are displayed in Table 1, and along are displayed in Table 2. The exact and numerical spacetime solutions for the given problem is depicted in Figure 2(a) and in Figure 2(b) respectively. The absolute error and error estimate are displayed in Figure 3(a). Figure 3(b) shows error functions for various values of The results confirms that our numerical scheme is accurate, stable and can solve multi-term time fractional wave-diffusion equations with less computation time.
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 20 | 35 | 7.77 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.14 | 0.343148 |
55 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.64 | 1.222487 | ||
75 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.2 | 5.000861 | ||
95 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.75 | 12.067666 | ||
110 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 9.30 | 22.244950 | ||
40 | 15 | 80 | 5.76 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 2.4 | 2.034147 |
50 | 4.70 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 2.4 | 3.430185 | ||
60 | 4.32 | 6.9 | 1.05 | 2.4 | 4.307865 | ||
70 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 2.4 | 5.308744 | ||
80 | 4.82 | 9.2 | 1.14 | 2.4 | 6.327198 | ||
70 | 12 | 90 | 2.33 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 8.646889 |
15 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 8.18 | 8.534781 | ||
18 | 8.80 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 8.18 | 8.898832 | ||
21 | 4.10 | 8.8 | 1.20 | 8.18 | 8.901062 | ||
24 | 9.30 | 9.0 | 1.26 | 8.18 | 8.835825 | ||
[14] | 4.79 |
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.51 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.201190 |
12 | 3.98 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.202626 | ||
14 | 4.20 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.213661 | ||
16 | 4.16 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.203777 | ||
18 | 4.99 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.204327 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 2.97 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.203400 |
40 | 5.99 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.212062 | ||
50 | 4.82 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.210793 | ||
70 | 9.41 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.222508 | ||
90 | 8.14 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.217812 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 7.56 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.211422 |
14 | 7.53 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.218499 | ||
16 | 6.68 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.224207 | ||
18 | 4.87 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.226878 | ||
20 | 4.67 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.239581 | ||
[14] | 5.69 |
As a second test problem we consider the following linear fractional equation
(5.4) |
where
The exact solution of the problem is
This equation is considered on with boundary conditions
(5.5) |
and initial conditions
(5.6) |
In this experiment we have utilized both the contours with the same set of optimal parameters. The numerical experiments are performed with different nodes in the global domain in the sub-domain. The results obtained for fractional orders , and are displayed in Table 3 along the path , and in Table 4 along the path . The approximate and exact spacetime solutions are displayed in Figures 4(a) and Figure 4(b). The plot of absolute error and error estimate is displayed in Figure 5(a). Figure 5(b) shows the plot of error functions for various values of and . The results verifies the accuracy, stability and efficiency of the proposed local meshless scheme for multi-term time fractional wave-diffusion equations.
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
60 | 22 | 40 | 8.44 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 1.83 | 0.667872 |
60 | 6.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.12 | 1.580686 | ||
80 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.4 | 7.362587 | ||
90 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 8.18 | 10.843996 | ||
100 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.76 | 15.784191 | ||
70 | 10 | 100 | 5.52 | 6.4 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 17.932164 |
12 | 2.74 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.76 | 17.859075 | ||
14 | 3.44 | 7.8 | 1.21 | 2.76 | 18.129870 | ||
18 | 5.21 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 2.76 | 18.278882 | ||
22 | 7.64 | 8.9 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 18.479720 | ||
50 | 25 | 90 | 9.85 | 6.5 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 8.730629 |
60 | 1.03 | 7.8 | 1.09 | 8.18 | 11.049126 | ||
70 | 5.40 | 9.1 | 1.14 | 8.18 | 13.349187 | ||
80 | 6.57 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.124607 | ||
90 | 6.17 | 11.8 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 17.134190 | ||
[14] | 7.0080 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 2.56 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.202184 |
12 | 2.91 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.197720 | ||
14 | 3.10 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.200589 | ||
16 | 3.25 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.202710 | ||
18 | 5.65 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.194221 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 3.74 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.202098 |
40 | 6.97 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.201783 | ||
50 | 6.68 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.204199 | ||
70 | 1.00 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.205864 | ||
90 | 1.36 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.216570 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 9.70 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.207446 |
14 | 4.34 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.206234 | ||
16 | 8.47 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.216176 | ||
18 | 4.76 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.215397 | ||
20 | 5.66 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.244942 | ||
[14] | 1.39 |
We consider the following fractional equation
(5.7) |
where
The exact solution of the problem is
This equation is considered on with boundary conditions
(5.8) |
and initial conditions
(5.9) |
The results obtained for third test problem with fractional orders and along the hyperbolic contour are displayed in Tables 5, and along the Talbots contour are displayed in Table 6. From the Tables it can be seen the method has good results in accuracy. Figures 6(a) shows the exact spacetime solution and Figure 6(b) shows the numerical spacetime solution. Figure 7(a), and Figure 7(b) absolute error and error estimate for the contour and respectively.
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 25 | 50 | 4.20 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 6.25 | 2.249386 |
60 | 3.85 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.12 | 4.114330 | ||
70 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 7.2 | 7.301508 | ||
90 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.044453 | ||
100 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.76 | 21.588645 | ||
60 | 27 | 90 | 9.51 | 7.9 | 1.06 | 8.18 | 11.338375 |
70 | 8.41 | 9.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 13.565846 | ||
80 | 1.15 | 10.6 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 15.034979 | ||
90 | 9.66 | 11.9 | 1.10 | 8.18 | 17.556509 | ||
100 | 7.93 | 13.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 21.605433 | ||
85 | 20 | 95 | 8.45 | 10.6 | 1.21 | 4.75 | 18.828414 |
22 | 5.73 | 10.9 | 1.01 | 4.75 | 19.612251 | ||
24 | 1.68 | 11.0 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.670357 | ||
27 | 4.26 | 11.2 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.563284 | ||
30 | 5.36 | 11.4 | 1.09 | 4.75 | 20.041057 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.54 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.142848 |
12 | 3.40 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.133224 | ||
14 | 2.83 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.134380 | ||
16 | 4.64 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.133445 | ||
18 | 5.19 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.136420 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 1.15 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.135380 |
40 | 5.10 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.142579 | ||
50 | 1.07 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.137483 | ||
70 | 1.44 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.145392 | ||
90 | 1.49 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.151340 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 1.29 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.144167 |
14 | 1.22 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.139500 | ||
16 | 8.31 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.148407 | ||
18 | 4.78 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.156982 | ||
20 | 9.51 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.166119 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
We consider the two dimensional multi-term time fractional wave-diffusion equation
(5.10) |
subject to zero initial conditions and the boundary conditions are generated from the exact solution
the given 2D test problem is solved with regular nodal points in rectangular, circular and complex domains.
The rectangular domain is descretized with uniformly distributed points. For this problem also we have used the hyperbolic contour and Talbot's contour with the same set of optimal parameters used for Problem 1. The uniform nodes distribution with boundary stencil red and interior stencil green are shown in Figure 8. The graphs of exact and approximate solutions for the parameters at are shown in the Figure 9(a) and Figure 9(b). The results obtained for various values of and along the path and are depicted in Table 7 and Table 8 respectively. From the results one can see that with large number of nodes the proposed method produced accurate results.
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 14 | 70 | 4.26 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 7.20 | 755.137804 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.71 | 7.20 | 756.918480 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 7.20 | 751.184383 | ||
20 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.20 | 748.664343 | ||
576 | 20 | 90 | 5.15 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 8.18 | 286.863124 |
676 | 5.08 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 8.18 | 421.440624 | ||
784 | 8.58 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 8.18 | 608.764593 | ||
900 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 8.18 | 861.916452 | ||
729 | 20 | 20 | 1.10 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 1.55 | 22.119245 |
30 | 7.80 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 5.73 | 48.770754 | ||
50 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 6.25 | 138.310373 | ||
80 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 2.40 | 386.725304 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 20 | 16 | 1.98 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.76 | 9.513650 |
18 | 2.15 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 5.64 | 10.640051 | ||
20 | 2.00 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 4.10 | 11.661281 | ||
22 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.824995 | ||
24 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.560164 | ||
900 | 14 | 24 | 4.28 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 2.16 | 13.026362 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.31 | 2.16 | 13.463156 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 2.16 | 13.591828 | ||
20 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.601463 | ||
576 | 20 | 22 | 5.11 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 2.97 | 4.451590 |
676 | 5.17 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 6.401350 | ||
784 | 8.14 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 2.97 | 9.076440 | ||
900 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.560123 | ||
961 | 8.06 | 2.4 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 14.919706 |
Here we solve the given problem in unit circle with center at . The domain is descretized with uniform nodes. The computational results for different values of and along and are depicted in Table 9 and Table 10 respectively. Figure 10(a) shows the uniform nodes in circular domain, whereas Figure 10(b) shows the absolute error computed along the hyperbolic path. The exact and approximate solutions are presented in Figures 11(a) and Figure 11(b). The proposed method produced results with good accuracy in circular domain.
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 60 | 15 | 8.30 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 2.63 | 38.116660 |
20 | 1.20 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.55 | 62.890208 | ||
30 | 9.23 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 5.37 | 133.694751 | ||
40 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.83 | 369.149122 | ||
900 | 30 | 50 | 1.30 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 6.25 | 361.783503 |
40 | 2.10 | 3.5 | 5.12 | 6.25 | 366.883195 | ||
50 | 2.20 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 6.25 | 363.312789 | ||
60 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 6.25 | 367.839901 | ||
300 | 59 | 60 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 553.852222 |
550 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 447.562447 | ||
800 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.883062 | ||
1100 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.921143 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 50 | 18 | 5.87 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 5.64 | 9.258343 |
20 | 7.60 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 4.10 | 9.959348 | ||
22 | 2.40 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.97 | 10.597861 | ||
24 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.16 | 11.241704 | ||
1050 | 10 | 26 | 9.43 | 1.2 | 7.70 | 1.57 | 9.389988 |
30 | 1.20 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 1.57 | 10.100778 | ||
50 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 1.57 | 11.882140 | ||
60 | 8.84 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.57 | 13.157724 | ||
750 | 59 | 28 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.662250 |
1150 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.759729 | ||
1250 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.572409 |
In the last test problem we have considered the complex shape domain. The domain is generated by In this experiment also we have used the contours and with the same set of optimal parameters used in Problem 1. The results obtained for fractional orders , and various nodes in the global domain and in the local domain and quadrature points along the contour and are shown in Table 11 and Table 12 respectively. The regular nodes distribution in the complex domain are shown in Figure 12(a), whereas the approximate and exact solutions are presented in Figures 12(b). Figure 13 shows the absolute error obtained using the Talbots contour. It can be seen that the proposed numerical method produced very accurate and stable results in the complex domain, this confirms the efficiency of the method for such type of equations.
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
851 | 50 | 40 | 4.70 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 1.83 | 50.524737 |
50 | 6.75 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 6.25 | 79.388630 | ||
60 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.12 | 116.511151 | ||
80 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.40 | 227.719695 | ||
852 | 30 | 70 | 1.30 | 2.9 | 6.40 | 7.20 | 147.655977 |
40 | 1.20 | 3.4 | 5.83 | 7.20 | 158.960295 | ||
50 | 9.34 | 3.9 | 1.82 | 7.20 | 219.043351 | ||
60 | 9.47 | 4.2 | 1.92 | 7.20 | 268.501711 | ||
457 | 60 | 60 | 6.97 | 3.0 | 3.07 | 2.12 | 68.420275 |
542 | 4.39 | 3.3 | 1.62 | 2.12 | 89.095051 | ||
643 | 4.86 | 3.6 | 1.79 | 2.12 | 117.459116 | ||
851 | 7.29 | 4.2 | 1.90 | 2.12 | 184.241136 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
752 | 30 | 24 | 1.10 | 2.7 | 3.89 | 2.16 | 3.188624 |
850 | 1.80 | 2.9 | 7.98 | 2.16 | 3.613122 | ||
921 | 1.50 | 3.0 | 2.48 | 2.16 | 4.028301 | ||
974 | 9.61 | 3.2 | 5.64 | 2.16 | 4.297978 | ||
1020 | 28 | 22 | 2.90 | 2.9 | 3.79 | 2.97 | 4.261794 |
40 | 1.90 | 3.7 | 2.62 | 2.97 | 5.485432 | ||
50 | 1.00 | 4.2 | 1.13 | 2.97 | 6.750489 | ||
60 | 9.32 | 4.6 | 6.25 | 2.97 | 8.366275 | ||
1095 | 70 | 18 | 6.47 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 5.64 | 10.452683 |
20 | 6.60 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 4.10 | 10.778798 | ||
22 | 9.01 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.97 | 11.238818 | ||
24 | 9.97 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.16 | 11.540931 |
In this work, a local meshless method based on Laplace transform has been utilized for the approximation of the numerical solution of 1D and 2D multi-term time fractional wave diffusion equations. We resolved the issue of time-instability which is the common short coming of time-stepping methods using the Laplace transformation, and the issues of ill-conditioning due to dense differentiation matrices and shape parameter sensitivity with localized meshless method. The stability and convergence of the method are discussed. To verify the theoretical results some test problem in 1D and a test problem in 2D are considered. For the two dimensional problem we have considered rectangular, circular, and complex domains. For numerical inversion of Laplace transform we have utilized two types of contours the hyperbolic and the improved Talbot's contour. The results obtained using these two contours were accurate and stable. However, the results show that the Talbot's contour is more efficient computationally. The benefit of this method is that it can approximate such type equations very efficiently and accurately with less computation time, and without any time instability. The obtained results proves the simplicity in implementation, efficiency, accuracy, and stability of the proposed method.
This work was supported by “the Construction team project of the introduction and cultivation of young innovative talents in Colleges and universities of Shandong Province of China, 2019 (Project Name: Big data and business intelligence social service innovation team)” and “the Social Science Planning Project of Qingdao, China,2018 (Grant No. QDSKL1801229)”.
The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
First and second authors revised the paper, solved the examples and used software to compute and sketch the results. Third author did analysis and wrote the paper. Forth proposed the problem and verified the results.
[1] |
R. Brockett, S. J. Glaser, N. Khaneja, Time optimal control in spin systems, Phys. Rev. A, 63 (2001), 032308. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.63.032308 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.63.032308
![]() |
[2] |
N. Khaneja, S. J. Glazer, R. Brockett, Sub-Riemannian geometry and time optimal control of three spin systems: quantum gates and coherence transfer, Phys. Rev. A, 65 (2002), 032301. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.65.032301 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.65.032301
![]() |
[3] | H. Yuan, Geometry, Optimal Control and Quantum Computing, Ph.D thesis, Harvard, 2006. |
[4] |
B. Bonnard, T. Combot, L. Jassionnesse, Integrability methods in the time minimal coherence transfer for Ising chains of three spins, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., 35 (2015), 4095–4114. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcds.2015.35.4095 doi: 10.3934/dcds.2015.35.4095
![]() |
[5] | P. Eberlein, Geometry of nonpositively curved manifolds. Chicago Lectures in Mathematics, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1996. |
[6] | S. Helgason, Differential Geometry, Lie Groups and Symmetric Spaces, Academic Press, New York, 1978. |
[7] | V. Jurdjevic, Optimal Control and Geometry: Integrable systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, (2016), Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316286852 |
[8] |
A. Agrachev, T. Chambrion, An estimation of the controllability time for single input time on compact Lie groups, ESAIM: Control, Optimization and Calculus of Variations, 12 (2006), 409–441. https://doi.org/10.1051/cocv:2006007 doi: 10.1051/cocv:2006007
![]() |
[9] |
J. P. Gauthier, F. Rossi, A universal gap for non-spin quantum control systems, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 149 (2021), 1203–1214. https://doi.org/10.1090/proc/15301 doi: 10.1090/proc/15301
![]() |
[10] |
F. Albertini, D. D'Alessandro, B. Sheller, Sub-Riemannian geodesics in and Optimal Control of Three Level Quantum Systems, IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 65 (2020), 1176–1191. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2019.2950559 doi: 10.1109/TAC.2019.2950559
![]() |
[11] | V. Jurdjevic, Geometric Control Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, New York, 1987. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511530036 |
[12] | A. A. Kirillov, Lectures on the orbit method., Graduate Studies in Mathematics, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1090/gsm/064 |
[13] | R. Montgomery Isoholonomic Problems and Some Applications, Commun. Math. Phys, 128 (1990), 565–592. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02096874 |
[14] |
V. Jurdjevic, H. J. Sussmann, Control systems on Lie groups, Jour. Diff. Equations, 12 (1972), 313–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0396(72)90035-6 doi: 10.1016/0022-0396(72)90035-6
![]() |
[15] | F. Wellstood, Notes about Bloch sphere, Lecture notes, 2016, University of Maryland. |
[16] |
N. Khaneja, S. J. Glaser, Efficient transfer of coherence through Ising spin chains, Phys. Rev. A, 66 (2002), 060301. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.66.060301 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.66.060301
![]() |
[17] |
H. Yuan, S. J. Glaser, N. Khaneja, Geodesics for efficient creation and propagation of order along Ising spin chains, Phys. Rev. A, 76 (2007), 012316. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.76.012316 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.76.012316
![]() |
[18] |
U. Boscain, T. Chambrion, J. P. Gauthier, On the K+P problem for a three-level quantum system: optimality implies resonance, J. Dynam. Control Systems, 8 (2002), 547–572. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020767419671 doi: 10.1023/A:1020767419671
![]() |
[19] |
H. Yuan, R. Zeier, N. Khaneja, Elliptic functions and efficient control of Ising spin chains with unequal couplings, Phys. Rev. A, 77 (2008), 032340. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.77.032340 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.032340
![]() |
[20] | R. Appell, E. Lacour Principes de la théorie des fonctions elliptiques, Gauthier Villars (1922). |
1. | Kamran Kamran, Zahir Shah, Poom Kumam, Nasser Aedh Alreshidi, A Meshless Method Based on the Laplace Transform for the 2D Multi-Term Time Fractional Partial Integro-Differential Equation, 2020, 8, 2227-7390, 1972, 10.3390/math8111972 | |
2. | Abdul Ghafoor, Nazish Khan, Manzoor Hussain, Rahman Ullah, A hybrid collocation method for the computational study of multi-term time fractional partial differential equations, 2022, 128, 08981221, 130, 10.1016/j.camwa.2022.10.005 | |
3. | Siraj Ahmad, Kamal Shah, Thabet Abdeljawad, Bahaaeldin Abdalla, On the Approximation of Fractal-Fractional Differential Equations Using Numerical Inverse Laplace Transform Methods, 2023, 135, 1526-1506, 2743, 10.32604/cmes.2023.023705 | |
4. | A. Ahmadian, M. Salimi, S. Salahshour, Local RBF Method for Transformed Three Dimensional Sub-Diffusion Equations, 2022, 8, 2349-5103, 10.1007/s40819-022-01338-w | |
5. | Monireh Nosrati Sahlan, Hojjat Afshari, Jehad Alzabut, Ghada Alobaidi, Using Fractional Bernoulli Wavelets for Solving Fractional Diffusion Wave Equations with Initial and Boundary Conditions, 2021, 5, 2504-3110, 212, 10.3390/fractalfract5040212 | |
6. | Ujala Gul, Zareen A. Khan, Salma Haque, Nabil Mlaiki, A Local Radial Basis Function Method for Numerical Approximation of Multidimensional Multi-Term Time-Fractional Mixed Wave-Diffusion and Subdiffusion Equation Arising in Fluid Mechanics, 2024, 8, 2504-3110, 639, 10.3390/fractalfract8110639 | |
7. | Aisha Subhan, Kamal Shah, Suhad Subhi Aiadi, Nabil Mlaiki, Fahad M. Alotaibi, Abdellatif Ben Makhlouf, Analysis of Volterra Integrodifferential Equations with the Fractal-Fractional Differential Operator, 2023, 2023, 1099-0526, 1, 10.1155/2023/7210126 | |
8. | Tao Hu, Cheng Huang, Sergiy Reutskiy, Jun Lu, Ji Lin, A Novel Accurate Method for Multi-Term Time-Fractional Nonlinear Diffusion Equations in Arbitrary Domains, 2024, 138, 1526-1506, 1521, 10.32604/cmes.2023.030449 |
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 20 | 35 | 7.77 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.14 | 0.343148 |
55 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.64 | 1.222487 | ||
75 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.2 | 5.000861 | ||
95 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.75 | 12.067666 | ||
110 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 9.30 | 22.244950 | ||
40 | 15 | 80 | 5.76 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 2.4 | 2.034147 |
50 | 4.70 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 2.4 | 3.430185 | ||
60 | 4.32 | 6.9 | 1.05 | 2.4 | 4.307865 | ||
70 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 2.4 | 5.308744 | ||
80 | 4.82 | 9.2 | 1.14 | 2.4 | 6.327198 | ||
70 | 12 | 90 | 2.33 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 8.646889 |
15 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 8.18 | 8.534781 | ||
18 | 8.80 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 8.18 | 8.898832 | ||
21 | 4.10 | 8.8 | 1.20 | 8.18 | 8.901062 | ||
24 | 9.30 | 9.0 | 1.26 | 8.18 | 8.835825 | ||
[14] | 4.79 |
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.51 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.201190 |
12 | 3.98 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.202626 | ||
14 | 4.20 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.213661 | ||
16 | 4.16 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.203777 | ||
18 | 4.99 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.204327 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 2.97 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.203400 |
40 | 5.99 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.212062 | ||
50 | 4.82 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.210793 | ||
70 | 9.41 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.222508 | ||
90 | 8.14 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.217812 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 7.56 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.211422 |
14 | 7.53 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.218499 | ||
16 | 6.68 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.224207 | ||
18 | 4.87 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.226878 | ||
20 | 4.67 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.239581 | ||
[14] | 5.69 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
60 | 22 | 40 | 8.44 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 1.83 | 0.667872 |
60 | 6.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.12 | 1.580686 | ||
80 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.4 | 7.362587 | ||
90 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 8.18 | 10.843996 | ||
100 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.76 | 15.784191 | ||
70 | 10 | 100 | 5.52 | 6.4 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 17.932164 |
12 | 2.74 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.76 | 17.859075 | ||
14 | 3.44 | 7.8 | 1.21 | 2.76 | 18.129870 | ||
18 | 5.21 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 2.76 | 18.278882 | ||
22 | 7.64 | 8.9 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 18.479720 | ||
50 | 25 | 90 | 9.85 | 6.5 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 8.730629 |
60 | 1.03 | 7.8 | 1.09 | 8.18 | 11.049126 | ||
70 | 5.40 | 9.1 | 1.14 | 8.18 | 13.349187 | ||
80 | 6.57 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.124607 | ||
90 | 6.17 | 11.8 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 17.134190 | ||
[14] | 7.0080 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 2.56 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.202184 |
12 | 2.91 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.197720 | ||
14 | 3.10 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.200589 | ||
16 | 3.25 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.202710 | ||
18 | 5.65 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.194221 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 3.74 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.202098 |
40 | 6.97 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.201783 | ||
50 | 6.68 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.204199 | ||
70 | 1.00 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.205864 | ||
90 | 1.36 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.216570 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 9.70 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.207446 |
14 | 4.34 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.206234 | ||
16 | 8.47 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.216176 | ||
18 | 4.76 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.215397 | ||
20 | 5.66 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.244942 | ||
[14] | 1.39 |
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 25 | 50 | 4.20 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 6.25 | 2.249386 |
60 | 3.85 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.12 | 4.114330 | ||
70 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 7.2 | 7.301508 | ||
90 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.044453 | ||
100 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.76 | 21.588645 | ||
60 | 27 | 90 | 9.51 | 7.9 | 1.06 | 8.18 | 11.338375 |
70 | 8.41 | 9.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 13.565846 | ||
80 | 1.15 | 10.6 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 15.034979 | ||
90 | 9.66 | 11.9 | 1.10 | 8.18 | 17.556509 | ||
100 | 7.93 | 13.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 21.605433 | ||
85 | 20 | 95 | 8.45 | 10.6 | 1.21 | 4.75 | 18.828414 |
22 | 5.73 | 10.9 | 1.01 | 4.75 | 19.612251 | ||
24 | 1.68 | 11.0 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.670357 | ||
27 | 4.26 | 11.2 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.563284 | ||
30 | 5.36 | 11.4 | 1.09 | 4.75 | 20.041057 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.54 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.142848 |
12 | 3.40 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.133224 | ||
14 | 2.83 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.134380 | ||
16 | 4.64 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.133445 | ||
18 | 5.19 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.136420 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 1.15 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.135380 |
40 | 5.10 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.142579 | ||
50 | 1.07 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.137483 | ||
70 | 1.44 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.145392 | ||
90 | 1.49 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.151340 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 1.29 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.144167 |
14 | 1.22 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.139500 | ||
16 | 8.31 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.148407 | ||
18 | 4.78 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.156982 | ||
20 | 9.51 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.166119 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 14 | 70 | 4.26 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 7.20 | 755.137804 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.71 | 7.20 | 756.918480 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 7.20 | 751.184383 | ||
20 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.20 | 748.664343 | ||
576 | 20 | 90 | 5.15 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 8.18 | 286.863124 |
676 | 5.08 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 8.18 | 421.440624 | ||
784 | 8.58 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 8.18 | 608.764593 | ||
900 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 8.18 | 861.916452 | ||
729 | 20 | 20 | 1.10 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 1.55 | 22.119245 |
30 | 7.80 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 5.73 | 48.770754 | ||
50 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 6.25 | 138.310373 | ||
80 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 2.40 | 386.725304 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 20 | 16 | 1.98 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.76 | 9.513650 |
18 | 2.15 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 5.64 | 10.640051 | ||
20 | 2.00 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 4.10 | 11.661281 | ||
22 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.824995 | ||
24 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.560164 | ||
900 | 14 | 24 | 4.28 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 2.16 | 13.026362 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.31 | 2.16 | 13.463156 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 2.16 | 13.591828 | ||
20 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.601463 | ||
576 | 20 | 22 | 5.11 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 2.97 | 4.451590 |
676 | 5.17 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 6.401350 | ||
784 | 8.14 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 2.97 | 9.076440 | ||
900 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.560123 | ||
961 | 8.06 | 2.4 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 14.919706 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 60 | 15 | 8.30 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 2.63 | 38.116660 |
20 | 1.20 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.55 | 62.890208 | ||
30 | 9.23 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 5.37 | 133.694751 | ||
40 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.83 | 369.149122 | ||
900 | 30 | 50 | 1.30 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 6.25 | 361.783503 |
40 | 2.10 | 3.5 | 5.12 | 6.25 | 366.883195 | ||
50 | 2.20 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 6.25 | 363.312789 | ||
60 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 6.25 | 367.839901 | ||
300 | 59 | 60 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 553.852222 |
550 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 447.562447 | ||
800 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.883062 | ||
1100 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.921143 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 50 | 18 | 5.87 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 5.64 | 9.258343 |
20 | 7.60 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 4.10 | 9.959348 | ||
22 | 2.40 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.97 | 10.597861 | ||
24 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.16 | 11.241704 | ||
1050 | 10 | 26 | 9.43 | 1.2 | 7.70 | 1.57 | 9.389988 |
30 | 1.20 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 1.57 | 10.100778 | ||
50 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 1.57 | 11.882140 | ||
60 | 8.84 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.57 | 13.157724 | ||
750 | 59 | 28 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.662250 |
1150 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.759729 | ||
1250 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.572409 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
851 | 50 | 40 | 4.70 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 1.83 | 50.524737 |
50 | 6.75 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 6.25 | 79.388630 | ||
60 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.12 | 116.511151 | ||
80 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.40 | 227.719695 | ||
852 | 30 | 70 | 1.30 | 2.9 | 6.40 | 7.20 | 147.655977 |
40 | 1.20 | 3.4 | 5.83 | 7.20 | 158.960295 | ||
50 | 9.34 | 3.9 | 1.82 | 7.20 | 219.043351 | ||
60 | 9.47 | 4.2 | 1.92 | 7.20 | 268.501711 | ||
457 | 60 | 60 | 6.97 | 3.0 | 3.07 | 2.12 | 68.420275 |
542 | 4.39 | 3.3 | 1.62 | 2.12 | 89.095051 | ||
643 | 4.86 | 3.6 | 1.79 | 2.12 | 117.459116 | ||
851 | 7.29 | 4.2 | 1.90 | 2.12 | 184.241136 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
752 | 30 | 24 | 1.10 | 2.7 | 3.89 | 2.16 | 3.188624 |
850 | 1.80 | 2.9 | 7.98 | 2.16 | 3.613122 | ||
921 | 1.50 | 3.0 | 2.48 | 2.16 | 4.028301 | ||
974 | 9.61 | 3.2 | 5.64 | 2.16 | 4.297978 | ||
1020 | 28 | 22 | 2.90 | 2.9 | 3.79 | 2.97 | 4.261794 |
40 | 1.90 | 3.7 | 2.62 | 2.97 | 5.485432 | ||
50 | 1.00 | 4.2 | 1.13 | 2.97 | 6.750489 | ||
60 | 9.32 | 4.6 | 6.25 | 2.97 | 8.366275 | ||
1095 | 70 | 18 | 6.47 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 5.64 | 10.452683 |
20 | 6.60 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 4.10 | 10.778798 | ||
22 | 9.01 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.97 | 11.238818 | ||
24 | 9.97 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.16 | 11.540931 |
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 20 | 35 | 7.77 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.14 | 0.343148 |
55 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 3.64 | 1.222487 | ||
75 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.2 | 5.000861 | ||
95 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.75 | 12.067666 | ||
110 | 7.61 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 9.30 | 22.244950 | ||
40 | 15 | 80 | 5.76 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 2.4 | 2.034147 |
50 | 4.70 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 2.4 | 3.430185 | ||
60 | 4.32 | 6.9 | 1.05 | 2.4 | 4.307865 | ||
70 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 2.4 | 5.308744 | ||
80 | 4.82 | 9.2 | 1.14 | 2.4 | 6.327198 | ||
70 | 12 | 90 | 2.33 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 8.646889 |
15 | 9.09 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 8.18 | 8.534781 | ||
18 | 8.80 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 8.18 | 8.898832 | ||
21 | 4.10 | 8.8 | 1.20 | 8.18 | 8.901062 | ||
24 | 9.30 | 9.0 | 1.26 | 8.18 | 8.835825 | ||
[14] | 4.79 |
, | , | , | |||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.51 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.201190 |
12 | 3.98 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.202626 | ||
14 | 4.20 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.213661 | ||
16 | 4.16 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.203777 | ||
18 | 4.99 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.204327 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 2.97 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.203400 |
40 | 5.99 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.212062 | ||
50 | 4.82 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.210793 | ||
70 | 9.41 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.222508 | ||
90 | 8.14 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.217812 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 7.56 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.211422 |
14 | 7.53 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.218499 | ||
16 | 6.68 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.224207 | ||
18 | 4.87 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.226878 | ||
20 | 4.67 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.239581 | ||
[14] | 5.69 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
60 | 22 | 40 | 8.44 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 1.83 | 0.667872 |
60 | 6.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.12 | 1.580686 | ||
80 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.4 | 7.362587 | ||
90 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 8.18 | 10.843996 | ||
100 | 8.62 | 7.6 | 1.18 | 2.76 | 15.784191 | ||
70 | 10 | 100 | 5.52 | 6.4 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 17.932164 |
12 | 2.74 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.76 | 17.859075 | ||
14 | 3.44 | 7.8 | 1.21 | 2.76 | 18.129870 | ||
18 | 5.21 | 8.5 | 1.17 | 2.76 | 18.278882 | ||
22 | 7.64 | 8.9 | 1.15 | 2.76 | 18.479720 | ||
50 | 25 | 90 | 9.85 | 6.5 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 8.730629 |
60 | 1.03 | 7.8 | 1.09 | 8.18 | 11.049126 | ||
70 | 5.40 | 9.1 | 1.14 | 8.18 | 13.349187 | ||
80 | 6.57 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.124607 | ||
90 | 6.17 | 11.8 | 1.02 | 8.18 | 17.134190 | ||
[14] | 7.0080 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 2.56 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.202184 |
12 | 2.91 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.197720 | ||
14 | 3.10 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.200589 | ||
16 | 3.25 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.202710 | ||
18 | 5.65 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.194221 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 3.74 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.202098 |
40 | 6.97 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.201783 | ||
50 | 6.68 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.204199 | ||
70 | 1.00 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.205864 | ||
90 | 1.36 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.216570 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 9.70 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.207446 |
14 | 4.34 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.206234 | ||
16 | 8.47 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.216176 | ||
18 | 4.76 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.215397 | ||
20 | 5.66 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.244942 | ||
[14] | 1.39 |
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
80 | 25 | 50 | 4.20 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 6.25 | 2.249386 |
60 | 3.85 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.12 | 4.114330 | ||
70 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 7.2 | 7.301508 | ||
90 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 8.18 | 15.044453 | ||
100 | 3.86 | 10.4 | 1.19 | 2.76 | 21.588645 | ||
60 | 27 | 90 | 9.51 | 7.9 | 1.06 | 8.18 | 11.338375 |
70 | 8.41 | 9.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 13.565846 | ||
80 | 1.15 | 10.6 | 1.01 | 8.18 | 15.034979 | ||
90 | 9.66 | 11.9 | 1.10 | 8.18 | 17.556509 | ||
100 | 7.93 | 13.2 | 1.16 | 8.18 | 21.605433 | ||
85 | 20 | 95 | 8.45 | 10.6 | 1.21 | 4.75 | 18.828414 |
22 | 5.73 | 10.9 | 1.01 | 4.75 | 19.612251 | ||
24 | 1.68 | 11.0 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.670357 | ||
27 | 4.26 | 11.2 | 1.16 | 4.75 | 19.563284 | ||
30 | 5.36 | 11.4 | 1.09 | 4.75 | 20.041057 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
, | , | ||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
70 | 12 | 10 | 3.54 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 2.02 | 0.142848 |
12 | 3.40 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.47 | 0.133224 | ||
14 | 2.83 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.134380 | ||
16 | 4.64 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 7.76 | 0.133445 | ||
18 | 5.19 | 7.3 | 1.02 | 5.64 | 0.136420 | ||
30 | 15 | 20 | 1.15 | 3.4 | 1.00 | 4.10 | 0.135380 |
40 | 5.10 | 4.5 | 1.37 | 4.10 | 0.142579 | ||
50 | 1.07 | 5.7 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.137483 | ||
70 | 1.44 | 8.0 | 1.24 | 4.10 | 0.145392 | ||
90 | 1.49 | 10.4 | 1.07 | 4.10 | 0.151340 | ||
80 | 12 | 20 | 1.29 | 8.3 | 1.15 | 4.10 | 0.144167 |
14 | 1.22 | 9.0 | 1.04 | 4.10 | 0.139500 | ||
16 | 8.31 | 9.4 | 1.17 | 4.10 | 0.148407 | ||
18 | 4.78 | 9.8 | 1.02 | 4.10 | 0.156982 | ||
20 | 9.51 | 10.0 | 1.13 | 4.10 | 0.166119 | ||
[14] | 8.81 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 14 | 70 | 4.26 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 7.20 | 755.137804 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.71 | 7.20 | 756.918480 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 7.20 | 751.184383 | ||
20 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.20 | 748.664343 | ||
576 | 20 | 90 | 5.15 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 8.18 | 286.863124 |
676 | 5.08 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 8.18 | 421.440624 | ||
784 | 8.58 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 8.18 | 608.764593 | ||
900 | 9.22 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 8.18 | 861.916452 | ||
729 | 20 | 20 | 1.10 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 1.55 | 22.119245 |
30 | 7.80 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 5.73 | 48.770754 | ||
50 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 6.25 | 138.310373 | ||
80 | 7.57 | 2.1 | 1.96 | 2.40 | 386.725304 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
900 | 20 | 16 | 1.98 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 7.76 | 9.513650 |
18 | 2.15 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 5.64 | 10.640051 | ||
20 | 2.00 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 4.10 | 11.661281 | ||
22 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.824995 | ||
24 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.560164 | ||
900 | 14 | 24 | 4.28 | 1.1 | 1.22 | 2.16 | 13.026362 |
16 | 1.12 | 1.7 | 3.31 | 2.16 | 13.463156 | ||
18 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 1.26 | 2.16 | 13.591828 | ||
20 | 9.12 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.16 | 13.601463 | ||
576 | 20 | 22 | 5.11 | 1.9 | 1.51 | 2.97 | 4.451590 |
676 | 5.17 | 2.0 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 6.401350 | ||
784 | 8.14 | 2.2 | 1.77 | 2.97 | 9.076440 | ||
900 | 8.40 | 2.4 | 1.48 | 2.97 | 12.560123 | ||
961 | 8.06 | 2.4 | 2.19 | 2.97 | 14.919706 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 60 | 15 | 8.30 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 2.63 | 38.116660 |
20 | 1.20 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.55 | 62.890208 | ||
30 | 9.23 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 5.37 | 133.694751 | ||
40 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.83 | 369.149122 | ||
900 | 30 | 50 | 1.30 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 6.25 | 361.783503 |
40 | 2.10 | 3.5 | 5.12 | 6.25 | 366.883195 | ||
50 | 2.20 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 6.25 | 363.312789 | ||
60 | 9.17 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 6.25 | 367.839901 | ||
300 | 59 | 60 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 553.852222 |
550 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 447.562447 | ||
800 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.883062 | ||
1100 | 9.77 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 2.12 | 531.921143 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
950 | 50 | 18 | 5.87 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 5.64 | 9.258343 |
20 | 7.60 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 4.10 | 9.959348 | ||
22 | 2.40 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.97 | 10.597861 | ||
24 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 2.16 | 11.241704 | ||
1050 | 10 | 26 | 9.43 | 1.2 | 7.70 | 1.57 | 9.389988 |
30 | 1.20 | 3.1 | 2.82 | 1.57 | 10.100778 | ||
50 | 1.90 | 4.1 | 2.43 | 1.57 | 11.882140 | ||
60 | 8.84 | 4.3 | 3.11 | 1.57 | 13.157724 | ||
750 | 59 | 28 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.662250 |
1150 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.759729 | ||
1250 | 9.36 | 4.3 | 3.06 | 1.14 | 13.572409 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
851 | 50 | 40 | 4.70 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 1.83 | 50.524737 |
50 | 6.75 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 6.25 | 79.388630 | ||
60 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.12 | 116.511151 | ||
80 | 6.74 | 4.0 | 1.13 | 2.40 | 227.719695 | ||
852 | 30 | 70 | 1.30 | 2.9 | 6.40 | 7.20 | 147.655977 |
40 | 1.20 | 3.4 | 5.83 | 7.20 | 158.960295 | ||
50 | 9.34 | 3.9 | 1.82 | 7.20 | 219.043351 | ||
60 | 9.47 | 4.2 | 1.92 | 7.20 | 268.501711 | ||
457 | 60 | 60 | 6.97 | 3.0 | 3.07 | 2.12 | 68.420275 |
542 | 4.39 | 3.3 | 1.62 | 2.12 | 89.095051 | ||
643 | 4.86 | 3.6 | 1.79 | 2.12 | 117.459116 | ||
851 | 7.29 | 4.2 | 1.90 | 2.12 | 184.241136 |
, | |||||||
C.TIME(sec) | |||||||
752 | 30 | 24 | 1.10 | 2.7 | 3.89 | 2.16 | 3.188624 |
850 | 1.80 | 2.9 | 7.98 | 2.16 | 3.613122 | ||
921 | 1.50 | 3.0 | 2.48 | 2.16 | 4.028301 | ||
974 | 9.61 | 3.2 | 5.64 | 2.16 | 4.297978 | ||
1020 | 28 | 22 | 2.90 | 2.9 | 3.79 | 2.97 | 4.261794 |
40 | 1.90 | 3.7 | 2.62 | 2.97 | 5.485432 | ||
50 | 1.00 | 4.2 | 1.13 | 2.97 | 6.750489 | ||
60 | 9.32 | 4.6 | 6.25 | 2.97 | 8.366275 | ||
1095 | 70 | 18 | 6.47 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 5.64 | 10.452683 |
20 | 6.60 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 4.10 | 10.778798 | ||
22 | 9.01 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.97 | 11.238818 | ||
24 | 9.97 | 5.1 | 2.15 | 2.16 | 11.540931 |