Optimal control of pandemics via a sociodemographic model of non-pharmaceutical interventions

Ryan Weightman; Temitope Akinode; Benedetto Piccoli; Ryan Weightman; Temitope Akinode; Benedetto Piccoli

doi:10.3934/nhm.2024022

Networks and Heterogeneous Media

2024, Volume 19, Issue 2: 500-525. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2024022

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Special Issues

Optimal control of pandemics via a sociodemographic model of non-pharmaceutical interventions

Center for Computational and Integrative Biology, Rutgers Camden, Camden NJ USA

Received: 15 January 2024 Revised: 25 April 2024 Accepted: 06 May 2024 Published: 14 May 2024

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need to quickly respond, via public policy, to the onset of an infectious disease breakout. Deciding the type and level of interventions a population must consider to mitigate risk and keep the disease under control could mean saving thousands of lives. Many models were quickly introduced highlighting lockdowns, testing, contact tracing, travel policies, later on vaccination, and other intervention strategies along with costs of implementation. Here, we provided a framework for capturing population heterogeneity whose consideration may be crucial when developing a mitigation strategy based on non-pharmaceutical interventions. Precisely, we used age-stratified data to segment our population into groups with unique interactions that policy can affect such as school children or the oldest of the population, and formulated a corresponding optimal control problem considering the economic cost of lockdowns and deaths. We applied our model and numerical methods to census data for the state of New Jersey and determined the most important factors contributing to the cost and the optimal strategies to contained the pandemic impact.

Keywords:

Citation: Ryan Weightman, Temitope Akinode, Benedetto Piccoli. Optimal control of pandemics via a sociodemographic model of non-pharmaceutical interventions[J]. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2024, 19(2): 500-525. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2024022

Related Papers:

[1]	Mahmoud Saleh, Endre Kovács, Nagaraja Kallur . Adaptive step size controllers based on Runge-Kutta and linear-neighbor methods for solving the non-stationary heat conduction equation. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2023, 18(3): 1059-1082. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2023046
[2]	Danielle Hilhorst, Hideki Murakawa . Singular limit analysis of a reaction-diffusion system with precipitation and dissolution in a porous medium. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2014, 9(4): 669-682. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2014.9.669
[3]	Changli Yuan, Mojdeh Delshad, Mary F. Wheeler . Modeling multiphase non-Newtonian polymer flow in IPARS parallel framework. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2010, 5(3): 583-602. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2010.5.583
[4]	Robert Carlson . Myopic models of population dynamics on infinite networks. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2014, 9(3): 477-499. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2014.9.477
[5]	Verónica Anaya, Mostafa Bendahmane, David Mora, Ricardo Ruiz Baier . On a vorticity-based formulation for reaction-diffusion-Brinkman systems. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2018, 13(1): 69-94. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2018004
[6]	Thomas Geert de Jong, Georg Prokert, Alef Edou Sterk . Reaction–diffusion transport into core-shell geometry: Well-posedness and stability of stationary solutions. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2025, 20(1): 1-14. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2025001
[7]	Steinar Evje, Aksel Hiorth, Merete V. Madland, Reidar I. Korsnes . A mathematical model relevant for weakening of chalk reservoirs due to chemical reactions. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2009, 4(4): 755-788. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2009.4.755
[8]	Narcisa Apreutesei, Vitaly Volpert . Reaction-diffusion waves with nonlinear boundary conditions. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2013, 8(1): 23-35. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2013.8.23
[9]	Matthieu Alfaro, Thomas Giletti . Varying the direction of propagation in reaction-diffusion equations in periodic media. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2016, 11(3): 369-393. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2016001
[10]	Panpan Xu, Yongbin Ge, Lin Zhang . High-order finite difference approximation of the Keller-Segel model with additional self- and cross-diffusion terms and a logistic source. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2023, 18(4): 1471-1492. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2023065

Abstract

1. Introduction

Reaction-diffusion phenomena is ubiquitous occurring mostly in different fields of science and engineering in which the system components interact ^[1,2,3,4,5]. They are used to describe population growth, propagation of travelling waves, pattern formation, other intriguing phenomena arising in combustion theory, tumor invasion, and neural networks spanning across various temporal and spatial scales ^[6,7,8,9]. Mathematically, the reaction-diffusion model is a parabolic partial differential equation (PDE) involving terms which denote diffusion and local reaction kinetics as given below:

$\begin{equation} \partial_{t}\mathrm{Y}-D\nabla^{2}\mathrm{Y} = Q(\mathrm{Y}), \end{equation}$

(1.1)

where the first term on the left side represents the temporal part, the second term represents the diffusion component, and the term on the right side of equation denotes the local reaction kinetics. For the choice of $Q(\mathrm{Y}) = \mathrm{Y} (1-\mathrm{Y})$ , the resultant model is Fisher's equation that can be used to describe population evolution and how the wave propagates in certain medium ^[10]. If $Q(\mathrm{Y}) = \mathrm{Y} (1-\mathrm{Y}^{2})$ , the reaction-diffusion is called Newell-Whitehead-Segel (NWS) equation which is primarily used to describe convection phenomena in fluid thermodynamics ^[11]. Zeldovich-Frank-Kamenetskii equation (ZFK) is obtained for the choice of $Q(\mathrm{Y}) = \mathrm{Y} (1-\mathrm{Y})e^{-\beta (1-\mathrm{Y})}$ . In combustion theory, the ZFK equation is used to describe how flames propagate ^[12].

In theoretical neuroscience, the most well-studied reaction diffusion equation is the FitzHugh-Nagumo (FHN) model ^[13,14]. The FHN model is the simplification of the Hodgkin-Huxley model for the action potentials in squid giant axon ^[15,16,17]. Although FHN is not phenomenological (the involved parameters are not biophysical), it is a good candidate for studying how an action potential is generated and propagated. The main advantage of the FHN is that the solution space is two-dimensional and hence geometrical phase plane tools can be utilized to show how the trajectory evolves, which gives rise to the excitability and spike mechanism of spike generation. In the phase plane diagram of the FHN neuronal model, one of the nullclines has cubic nonlinearity. Over the last few decades, due to its model simplicity, FHN gained a lot of attention in the scientific community. Besides the generation and propagation of a train of spikes, FHN is also used to explained the dynamics of various physical systems in several fields of science, typically in the propagation of flame, Brownian motion process, autocatalytic chemical reaction, growth of logistic population, and neurophysiology ^[18,19].

Consider the following scaler reaction diffusion model with constant coefficients:

$\begin{equation} \partial_{t}\mathrm{Y}-\partial_{\xi\xi}\mathrm{Y} = \mathrm{Y}(1-\mathrm{Y})(\mathrm{Y}-\eta), \end{equation}$

(1.2)

where $\eta$ is a known real number and $\mathrm{Y}(\xi, t)$ is an unknown function to be determined. In this equation, the local reaction kinetics is denoted by the cubic function $\mathrm{Y}(1-\mathrm{Y})(\mathrm{Y}-\eta)$ . For $\eta = -1$ , Eq (1.2) reduces to the NWS equation.

In literature, various analytical and numerical strategies have been used to solve FHN-type equation. Shih et al. ^[20] used approximate conditional Lie point symmetry method for the numerical solution of the perturbed FHN-type equations. Mehta et al. ^[21] solved such nonlinear time dependent problems by using a novel block method coupled with compact finite difference schemes. In the perturbed model, the term $\epsilon \mathrm{Y}$ has been added to the cubic term and for $\epsilon = 0,$ the problem reduces to an unperturbed FHN-type model. Li and Guo implemented an integral approach for the exact solution of FHN-type equations ^[22]. Abbasbandy proposed a homotopy analysis method (HAM) to calculate a solitary-type solution of the nonlinear FHN-type model ^[23]. Kawahara and Tanaka derived the exact solution for the interaction of traveling fronts ^[24]. Gorder and Vajravelua obtained exact solutions for FHN-type equations and Nagumo telegraph equation using a variational method for fixed initial conditions in order to control the error ^[25]. Ali et al. proposed a Galerkin finite element method for the numerical solutions of FHN-type equation^[26]. Mehran and Sadegh used a non-conventional finite difference scheme for the numerical solutions of FHN-type equations ^[27]. Gorder implemented HAM for the approximate solutions of FHN-type reaction diffusion equations ^[28].

Reaction-diffusion of FHN-type equations discusses previously involved constant coefficients. However, in general, time-dependent coefficients and dispersion-reaction terms involved in such models are more realistic physically ^[29,30,31]. Due to variation in problem geometry and taking into account the factor of heterogeneity in the propagating medium, FHN-type models with time-dependent coefficients are quite sophisticated to study.

The main goal of this work is to demonstrate the numerical solutions of the generalized FitzHugh Nagumo (GFHN) equation with a linear dispersion term and time-dependent coefficients, which are given below:

$\begin{equation} \partial_{t}\mathrm{Y}+\alpha(t)\partial_{\xi}\mathrm{Y}-\vartheta(t)\partial_{\xi\xi}\mathrm{Y} -\delta(t)\mathrm{Y}(1-\mathrm{Y})(\mathrm{Y}-\eta) = 0,\; (\xi,t)\in[a,b]\times[0,t], \end{equation}$

(1.3)

where $\alpha(t)$ , $\vartheta(t)$ , and $\delta(t)$ are time-dependent coefficients. The associated initial condition is:

$\begin{equation} \mathrm{Y}(\xi,0) = \psi_{0}(\xi), \; \xi\in[a,b], \end{equation}$

(1.4)

and the boundary conditions are:

$\begin{equation} \mathrm{Y}(a,t) = \psi_{a}(t),\; \mathrm{Y}(b,t) = \psi_{b}(t), \,\, t\geq 0, \end{equation}$

(1.5)

where $\psi_{0}(\xi), \psi_{a}(t),$ and $\psi_{b}(t)$ are the known functions.

In recent literature, various authors computed the numerical solutions of GFHN equation with time-dependent coefficients. For instance, tanh and the Jacobi Gauss Lobatto collocation technique ^[18,29], the polynomial differential quadrature method ^[32], and the mixed-types discontinuous Galerkin method ^[33,34] were used.

Recently, wavelet numerical procedures attracted different researchers in various scientific communities because of their good properties and easy implementation. Some interesting aspects of wavelet methods include, compact support, localization in time and space, and multi-resistant analysis. Among different families of wavelet, Haar wavelet (HW) is simple and popular. The importance of the HW has been explored in various articles: Lepik proposed HW-based methods for different problems ^[35], Jiwari ^[36] utilized the HW method for the solution of Burger's equation, Kumar and Pandit ^[37] solved coupled Burger's equations using the HW method, Shiralashetti et al. ^[38] used the HW scheme for the numerical solutions of the initial valued problems. For further analysis of the HW, interested readers are referred to ^[39,40,41]. The remaining parts of the paper are presented in the following pattern:

● The underlying motivation and preliminaries are given in Sections 2 and 3, respectively.

● The proposed methodology is presented in Section 4.

● Numerical results and stability are reported in Sections 5 and 6.

● Finally, conclusions are drawn in Section 7.

2. Main motive

The analytical solution of the time-dependent coefficients partial differential equations is quite complicated to compute. Therefore, numerical treatment is an alternative and an efficient way to cope with this issue. According to our analysis, the method of lines using the HW is not proposed for FHN-type models. In this work, we propose an HW-based method of lines for the solutions of FHN-type equations. The theoretical stability and its numerical verification will also be a part of this work.

3. Haar wavelet and its integrals

Here, we address some basic results. Consider an arbitrary interval $[a, b)$ and divide it into $2L$ equal subintervals of length $\partial \xi = \frac{b-a}{2L}$ , where $L = 2^\mathcal{J}$ represents the maximum level of resolution. Define the dilation and translational parameters as $j = 0, 1, ..., \mathcal{J}$ , $\mathcal{K} = 0, 1, ..., l-1$ , where $l = 2^{j}$ , respectively. Using the dilation and translational parameters, define the wavelet number $\iota = l+\mathcal{K}+1$ . Now the first and $\iota$ -th HW are given below ^[35]:

$\begin{eqnarray} \mathrm{h}_{1}(\xi) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 1, & { \xi\in[a,b) },\\ 0, & \mbox{elsewhere} .\end{array} \right. \end{eqnarray}$

(3.1)

$\begin{eqnarray} \mathrm{h}_{\iota}(\xi) = \left\{ \begin{array}{lll} 1, & { \xi\in[\zeta_{1}(\iota), \zeta_{2}(\iota)) },\\ -1, & { \xi\in[\zeta_{2}(\iota), \zeta_{3}(\iota)) },\\ 0, & \mbox{elsewhere,}\end{array} \right. \end{eqnarray}$

(3.2)

where $\zeta_{1}(\iota) = a+2\mathcal{K}\omega\partial \xi$ , $\zeta_{1}(\iota) = a+(2\mathcal{K}+1)\omega\delta \xi$ , $\zeta_{3}(\iota) = a+2(\mathcal{K}+1)\omega\partial \xi,$ and $\omega = \frac{\mathrm{L}}{l}$ .

In our analysis, we will use the following integrals:

$\begin{equation} \beta_{\iota,\alpha}(\xi) = \displaystyle {\int}_{a}^{\xi}\displaystyle {\int}_{a}^{\xi},...,\displaystyle {\int}_{a}^{\xi}\mathrm{h}_{\iota}(z) dz^{\alpha} = \frac{1}{(\alpha-1)!}\displaystyle {\int}_{a}^{\xi}(\xi-z)^{\alpha-1}\mathrm{h}_{\iota}(z) dz, \end{equation}$

(3.3)

where $\alpha = 1, 2, 3, ..., n$ and $\iota = 1, 2, 3, ..., 2L$ . Analytically, the evaluation of these integrals for Eqs (3.1) and (3.2) are given below:

$\begin{equation} \beta_{1,\alpha}(\xi) = \frac{(\xi-a)^\alpha}{\alpha!}, \end{equation}$

(3.4)

$\begin{eqnarray} \begin{gathered} \beta_{\iota,\alpha}(\xi) = \left\{ \begin{array}{llll} 0, & { \xi < \zeta_{1}(\iota) },\\ \frac{1}{\alpha!}[\xi-\zeta_{1}(\iota)]^{\alpha}, & { \xi\in[\zeta_{1}(\iota),\zeta_{2}(\iota)] },\\ \frac{1}{\alpha!}[(\xi-\zeta_{1}(\iota))^{\alpha}-2(\xi-\zeta_{2}(\iota))^{\alpha}], & { \xi\in[\zeta_{2}(\iota),\zeta_{3}(\iota)] },\\ \frac{1}{\alpha!}[(\xi-\zeta_{1}(\iota))^{\alpha}-2(\xi-\zeta_{2}(\iota))^{\alpha}+(\xi-\zeta_{3}(\iota))^{\alpha}],& { \xi > \zeta_{3}(\iota) }.\end{array} \right. \ \end{gathered} \end{eqnarray}$

(3.5)

4. Proposed scheme

In this section, the proposed method is described in detail. Here, an integral approach is utilized, therefore, the greatest order spatial derivative in Eq (1.3) can be approximated via the HW series as:

$\begin{equation} \partial_{\xi\xi}\mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = \sum\limits_{\iota = 1}^{2L}\lambda_\iota(t) \mathrm{h}_\iota(\xi), \end{equation}$

(4.1)

where $\lambda_\iota (t)$ denotes the unknown HW coefficients and $\mathrm{h}_\iota(\xi)$ are HW basis. From Eq (4.1), we deduce the following equations via twice integration:

$\begin{equation} \partial_{\xi}\mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = \sum\limits_{\iota = 1}^{2L}\lambda_\iota(t) \beta_{1,\iota}(\xi)+\partial_\xi\mathrm{Y}(\xi,t)|_{\xi = a}, \end{equation}$

(4.2)

$\begin{equation} \mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = \sum\limits_{\iota = 1}^{2L}\lambda_\iota \beta_{2,\iota}(\xi)+(\xi-a)\partial_\xi\mathrm{Y}(\xi,t)|_{\xi = a}+\mathrm{Y}(\xi,t)|_{\xi = a}. \end{equation}$

(4.3)

The evaluation of Eq (4.3) at $\xi = b$ gives:

$\begin{equation} \partial _{\xi}\mathrm{Y}(a,t) = \frac{\psi_{b}(t)-\psi_{a}(t)}{b-a}-\frac{1}{b-a}\sum\limits_{\iota = 1}^{2L}\lambda_\iota(t) \beta_{2,\iota}(b). \end{equation}$

(4.4)

Plugging $\partial _{\xi}\mathrm{Y}(a, t)$ in Eqs (4.2) and (4.3), we get:

$\begin{equation} \partial_{\xi}\mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = \sum\limits_{\iota = 1}^{2L}\lambda_\iota(t)\big[\beta_{1,\iota}(\xi)-\frac{1}{(b-a)}\beta_{2,\iota}(b)\big]+\frac{1}{(b-a)}\big(\psi_{b}(t) -\psi_{a}(t) \big), \end{equation}$

(4.5)

$\begin{equation} \mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = \sum\limits_{\iota = 1}^{2L}\lambda_\iota(t)\big[\beta_{2,\iota}(\xi)-\frac{(\xi-a)}{(b-a)}\beta_{2,\iota}(b)\big]+\frac{(\xi-a)}{(b-a)}\psi_{b}(t)+\frac{(b-\xi)}{(b-a)}\psi_{a}(t). \end{equation}$

(4.6)

Now, the corresponding matrix form of Eqs (4.1)–(4.5), and (4.6) by using $\xi \rightarrow \xi_{m}$ are:

$\begin{equation} \partial_{\xi\xi}\mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = H(\xi_{m})\lambda(t), \end{equation}$

(4.7)

$\begin{equation} \partial_{\xi}\mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = \mathrm{M}_{1}(\xi_{m})\lambda(t)+\mathrm{M}_{2}(t), \end{equation}$

(4.8)

$\begin{equation} \mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = \mathrm{N}_{1}(\xi_{m})\lambda(t)+\mathrm{N}_{2}(t), \end{equation}$

(4.9)

where

$\mathrm{M}_{1}(\xi_{m}) = \sum\limits_{\iota = 1}^{2L}\big[\beta_{1,\iota}(\xi_{m})-\frac{1}{(b-a)}\beta_{2,\iota}(b)\big],\; \mathrm{M}_{2}(t) = \frac{1}{(b-a)}\big(\psi_{b}(t) - \psi_{a}(t) \big),$

$\mathrm{N}_{1}(\xi_{m}) = \big[\beta_{2,\iota}(\xi_{m})-\frac{(\xi_{m}-a)}{(b-a)}\beta_{2,\iota}(b)\big],\; \mathrm{N}_{2}(t) = \frac{(\xi_{m}-a)}{(b-a)}\psi_{b}(t)+\frac{(b-\xi_{m})}{(b-a)}\psi_{a}(t).$

From Eqs (4.7)–(4.9) and (1.3), the following equation can be obtained:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\frac{d\mathrm{Y}_{m}(t)}{dt} = -\alpha(t)\Big(\mathrm{M}_{1}(\xi_{m})\lambda(t)-\mathrm{M}_{2}(t)\Big) +\vartheta(t)H(\xi_{m}) \big)+\delta(t)\Big[(\mathrm{N}_{1}(\xi_{m})\lambda(t) +\mathrm{N}_{2}(t))*\\ &\Big(1-(\mathrm{N}_{1}(\xi_{m})\lambda(t)+\mathrm{N}_{2}(t))\Big)*\Big((\mathrm{N}_{1}(\xi_{m})\lambda(t)+\mathrm{N}_{2}(t))-\eta \Big)\Big],\; \xi\in[a,b], \; t > 0, \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.10)

where "*" represents an element wise product. In a more compact form, Eq (4.10) can be written as:

$\begin{equation} \frac{d \mathrm{Y}}{dt} = \mathbf{F}(t,\mathrm{Y}),\; \mathrm{Y}(0) = \psi_{0}, \end{equation}$

(4.11)

where $\mathbf{F}(t, \mathrm{Y}) = \vartheta(t)\big(\mathrm{h}\lambda(t) \big)- \alpha(t)\Big(\mathrm{M}_{1}\lambda(t)+\mathrm{M}_{2}(t)\Big)$ - $\delta(t) \Big[(\mathrm{N}_{1}\lambda(t)+\mathrm{N}_{2}(t))*\Big(1-(\mathrm{N}_{1}\lambda(t) +\mathrm{N}_{2}(t))\Big)*\Big((\mathrm{N}_{1}\lambda(t)+\mathrm{N}_{2}(t))-\eta \Big)\Big].$

Here, Eq (4.11) represents the system of first-order ordinary differential equations, which can be solved via the RK-4 scheme discussed in a later section.

4.1. Temporal discretization

To obtain the solutions of Eq (4.11), we use the following $\mbox{RK-4}$ scheme:

$\begin{gathered} \mathcal{K}_1 = \mathbf{F}(t^m ,\mathrm{Y}^m), \\ \mathcal{K}_2 = \mathbf{F}(t^m + \frac{\partial t}{2} , \mathrm{Y}^m+\frac{\mathcal{K}_1}{2}), \\ \mathcal{K}_3 = \mathbf{F}(t^m + \frac{\partial t}{2},\mathrm{Y}^m+\frac{\mathcal{K}_2}{2}), \\ \mathcal{K}_4 = \mathbf{F}(t^m + {\partial t},\mathrm{Y}+{\mathcal{K}_3}).\\ \mathrm{Y}^{m+1} = \mathrm{Y}^{m}+\frac{\partial t}{6}\big(\mathcal{K}_1 +2(\mathcal{K}_2+\mathcal{K}_3)+\mathcal{K}_4\big), \,\,\, m\geq 0, \end{gathered}$

(4.12)

where $\partial t$ is the time step size.

5. Simulations and comparison

In this section, numerical solutions of GFHN with constant and time-dependent coefficient are listed. The efficiency of the proposed scheme is checked by applying different error measures, namely: $L_2$ , $L_\infty$ , and $L_{rms}$ as described below:

$\begin{equation} L_2 = \|\mathrm{Y}^E-\mathrm{Y}^N\|_{2}\cong\sqrt{\delta \xi \sum\limits_{\iota = 1}^{2L} {\mid{\mathrm{Y}_{\iota}^E-\mathrm{Y}_{\iota}^N}\mid}^2}, \end{equation}$

(5.1)

$\begin{equation} L_\infty = \|\mathrm{Y}^E-\mathrm{Y}^N\|_{\infty}\cong max_{\infty} {\mid{\mathrm{Y}_{\iota}^E-\mathrm{Y}_{\iota}^N}\mid}, \end{equation}$

(5.2)

$\begin{equation} L_{rms} = \sqrt{\sum\limits_{\iota = 1}^{2L}\big(\frac{\mathrm{Y}^E-\mathrm{Y}^N}{\sqrt{2L}} \big)^2}. \end{equation}$

(5.3)

5.1. Problem 1

Here, we consider Eq (1.2) with constant coefficients and various choices of the exact solutions:

$\begin{equation*} \label{e1.1} \begin{split} &\mbox{case}\; (i) :\; \mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = \frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2}\tanh\Big[\frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}}\big( \xi-\frac{2\eta-1}{\sqrt{2}}t\big) \Big],\\ &\mbox{case}\; (ii) :\; \mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = \frac{1}{2}(1+\alpha)+\frac{1}{2}(1-\alpha)\tanh\Big[\frac{(1-\alpha)}{2\sqrt{2}} \xi+\frac{(1-\alpha^2)}{2\sqrt{2}}t \Big],\\ &\mbox{case}\; (iii) :\; \mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = \frac{1}{1+\exp\big[\frac{-\xi+(\sqrt{2}(\frac{1}{2}-\eta))t}{\sqrt{2}} \big]},\\ &\mbox{case}\; (iv) :\; \mathrm{Y}(\xi,t) = \Big[\frac{1}{2}\Big]\Big[1-\coth\big(\frac{\xi}{2\sqrt{2}}+\frac{2\eta-1}{4}t+\frac{\pi}{4}\big)\Big].\\ \end{split} \end{equation*}$

The associated initial and boundary conditions for all cases are used from the exact solutions. Simulations are done in different spatial domains to test the technique, and a comparison is made with the previously published work. The spatial domains used for case $(i)$ are $[0, 1]$ and $[-10, 10]$ , for case $(ii)$ is $[-22, 22]$ , for case $(iii)$ are $[0, 1]$ and $[-10, 10]$ , while for case $(iv)$ is the interval $[-10, 10]$ . The obtained results of case $(i)$ in $[-10, 10]$ with different values of $\eta$ are given in –, while the outcomes in the interval $[0, 1]$ with various values of $\eta$ are given in Table 4.

Table 1. Outcomes of problem 1 for case

$(i)$ with

$\eta = 0.75$ .

	Present ( $\partial t=0.0001$ )			Present ( $\partial t=0.001$ )			Present ( $\partial t=0.1$ )
$t$	$L_\infty$	$L_{rms}$	CPU time (Seconds)	$L_\infty$	$L_{rms}$	CPU time (Seconds)	$L_\infty$	$L_{rms}$	CPU time (Seconds)
0.2	$6.387\times10^{-6}$	$1.844\times10^{-7}$	6.240240	$1.203\times10^{-5}$	$1.782\times10^{-6}$	2.195968	$8.339\times10^{-4}$	$1.835\times10^{-4}$	1.624090
0.5	$1.414\times10^{-5}$	$4.959\times10^{-7}$	8.821217	$2.809\times10^{-5}$	$4.515\times10^{-6}$	2.954488	$2.027\times10^{-3}$	$4.626\times10^{-4}$	1.805044
1.0	$2.419\times10^{-5}$	$1.124\times10^{-6}$	13.053880	$5.211\times10^{-5}$	$9.234\times10^{-6}$	3.111479	$3.917\times10^{-3}$	$9.362\times10^{-4}$	1.839039
1.5	$3.230\times10^{-5}$	$1.899\times10^{-6}$	18.199838	$7.429\times10^{-5}$	$1.415\times10^{-5}$	5.149131	$5.822\times10^{-3}$	$1.418\times10^{-3}$	1.942381
2.0	$3.926\times10^{-5}$	$2.816\times10^{-6}$	23.565382	$9.548\times10^{-5}$	$1.924\times10^{-5}$	4.562245	$7.718\times10^{-3}$	$1.906\times10^{-3}$	1.919129
5.0	$7.276\times10^{-5}$	$1.0461\times10^{-5}$	54.294368	$2.174\times10^{-4}$	$5.217\times10^{-5}$	8.126805	$1.840\times10^{-2}$	$4.896\times10^{-3}$	2.256312
	^[42] ( $\partial t=0.0001$ )			^[32] ( $\partial t=0.001$ )			^[43] ( $\partial t=0.1$ )
$t$	$L_\infty$	$L_{rms}$		$L_\infty$	$L_{rms}$		$L_\infty$	$L_{rms}$
0.2	$1.889\times10^{-5}$	$2.196\times10^{-7}$		$4.741\times10^{-5}$	$1.588\times10^{-5}$		$1.887\times10^{-5}$	$7.455\times10^{-6}$
0.5	$4.155\times10^{-5}$	$1.569\times10^{-6}$		$1.231\times10^{-4}$	$3.843\times10^{-5}$		$4.151\times10^{-5}$	$1.641\times10^{-5}$
1.0	$6.989\times10^{-5}$	$7.144\times10^{-6}$		$2.626\times10^{-4}$	$8.187\times10^{-5}$		$6.973\times10^{-5}$	$2.743\times10^{-5}$
1.5	$9.168\times10^{-5}$	$1.726\times10^{-5}$		$4.209\times10^{-4}$	$1.338\times10^{-4}$		$9.118\times10^{-5}$	$3.534\times10^{-5}$
2.0	$1.096\times10^{-4}$	$3.185\times10^{-5}$		$5.999\times10^{-3}$	$1.943\times10^{-4}$		$1.085\times10^{-4}$	$4.128\times10^{-5}$
5.0	$1.896\times10^{-4}$	$1.880\times10^{-4}$		$2.305\times10^{-3}$	$7.863\times10^{-4}$		$1.800\times10^{-4}$	$6.134\times10^{-5}$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 2. Outcomes of problem 1 for case

$(i)$ with

$\eta = -1$ .

		$t=0.1$			$t=0.5$			$t=1.0$
	$\xi$	Exact	Numerical	Error	Exact	Numerical	Error	Exact	Numerical	Error
Present
	-10	$1.013383\times10^{-3}$	$1.013382\times10^{-3}$	$8.713\times10^{-10}$	$1.844968\times10^{-3}$	1.844963 $\times10^{-3}$	$4.687\times10^{-9}$	$3.897765\times10^{-3}$	$3.897749\times10^{-3}$	$1.573\times10^{-8}$
	-7	$8.209472\times10^{-3}$	$8.209430\times10^{-3}$	$4.275\times10^{-8}$	$1.485835\times10^{-2}$	1.485800 $\times10^{-2}$	$3.444\times10^{-7}$	$3.094160\times10^{-2}$	$3.094052\times10^{-2}$	$1.078\times10^{-6}$
	-3	$1.216556\times10^{-1}$	$1.216557\times10^{-1}$	$1.920\times10^{-7}$	$2.015162\times10^{-1}$	2.015188 $\times10^{-1}$	$2.553\times10^{-6}$	$3.482263\times10^{-1}$	$3.482340\times10^{-1}$	$7.646\times10^{-6}$
	0	$5.305565\times10^{-1}$	$5.305566\times10^{-1}$	$1.619\times10^{-7}$	$6.731305\times10^{-1}$	6.731300 $\times10^{-1}$	$5.918\times10^{-7}$	$8.134186\times10^{-1}$	$8.134174\times10^{-1}$	$1.247\times10^{-6}$
	3	$9.069410\times10^{-1}$	$9.069410\times10^{-1}$	$2.120\times10^{-7}$	$9.466898\times10^{-1}$	9.466899 $\times10^{-1}$	$1.552\times10^{-7}$	$9.740892\times10^{-1}$	$9.740895\times10^{-1}$	$3.233\times10^{-7}$
	7	$9.939053\times10^{-1}$	$9.939053\times10^{-1}$	$3.713\times10^{-8}$	$9.966459\times10^{-1}$	9.966460 $\times10^{-1}$	$1.017\times10^{-7}$	$9.984128\times10^{-1}$	$9.984129\times10^{-1}$	$9.444\times10^{-8}$
	10	$9.992490\times10^{-1}$	$9.992490\times10^{-1}$	$7.370\times10^{-10}$	$9.995877\times10^{-1}$	9.995877 $\times10^{-1}$	$1.214\times10^{-9}$	$9.998052\times10^{-1}$	$9.998052\times10^{-1}$	$9.589\times10^{-10}$
^[33]
	-10	$0.123172E\times10^{-2}$	$0.123147\times10^{-2}$	$2.974\times10^{-6}$	$0.273123\times10^{-2}$	0.273299 $\times10^{-2}$	$1.086\times10^{-6}$	$0.639709\times10^{-2}$	$0.639771\times10^{-2}$	$4.544\times10^{-6}$
	-7	$0.799954\times10^{-2}$	$0.800058\times10^{-2}$	$1.005\times10^{-6}$	$0.149620\times10^{-1}$	0.149662 $\times10^{-1}$	$1.086\times10^{-6}$	$0.639709\times10^{-2}$	$0.639771\times10^{-2}$	$4.544\times10^{-6}$
	-3	$0.122814\times10^{+0}$	$0.122808\times10^{+0}$	$1.352\times10^{-6}$	$0.198331\times10^{+0}$	0.198340 $\times10^{+0}$	$2.984\times10^{-6}$	$0.351539\times10^{+0}$	$0.351533\times10^{+0}$	$9.543\times10^{-3}$
	0	$0.537579\times10^{+0}$	$0.537585\times10^{+0}$	$1.550\times10^{-6}$	$0.680017\times10^{+0}$	0.680007 $\times10^{+0}$	$8.287\times10^{-6}$	$0.819036\times10^{+0}$	$0.819048\times10^{+0}$	$4.715\times10^{-6}$
	3	$0.909059\times10^{+0}$	$0.909004\times10^{+0}$	$2.442\times10^{-6}$	$0.9487161\times10^{+0}$	0.948717 $\times10^{+0}$	$9.415\times10^{-6}$	$0.975932\times10^{+0}$	$0.975967\times10^{+0}$	$3.343\times10^{-6}$
	7	$0.994343\times10^{+0}$	$0.994331\times10^{+0}$	$2.683\times10^{-6}$	$0.997526\times10^{+0}$	0.997569 $\times10^{+0}$	$9.821\times10^{-7}$	$0.999603\times10^{+0}$	$0.999694\times10^{+0}$	$1.900\times10^{-6}$
	10	$0.999376\times10^{+0}$	$0.999372\times10^{+0}$	$9.138\times10^{-7}$	$0.9999983\times10^{+0}$	0.100002 $\times10^{+1}$	$7.363\times10^{-7}$	$0.999998\times10^{+0}$	$0.100001\times10^{+1}$	$1.930\times10^{-7}$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 3. Solutions of problem 1 for case

$(i)$ with

$\eta = -2$ .

	$t=0.1$			$t=0.5$			$t=1.0$
$\xi$	Exact	Numerical	Error	Exact	Numerical	Error	Exact	Numerical	Error
-10	$1.119842\times10^{-3}$	$1.119841\times10^{-3}$	$9.172\times10^{-10}$	$3.038202\times10^{-3}$	3.038195 $\times10^{-3}$	$7.248\times10^{-9}$	$1.052473\times10^{-2}$	$1.052469\times10^{-2}$	$3.677\times10^{-8}$
-7	$9.065044\times10^{-3}$	$9.064999\times10^{-3}$	$4.448\times10^{-8}$	$2.426341\times10^{-2}$	2.426292 $\times10^{-2}$	$4.832\times10^{-7}$	$7.986202\times10^{-2}$	$7.986054\times10^{-2}$	$1.479\times10^{-6}$
-3	$1.327517\times10^{-1}$	$1.327520\times10^{-1}$	$2.791\times10^{-7}$	$2.938320\times10^{-1}$	2.938363 $\times10^{-1}$	$4.239\times10^{-6}$	$5.922212\times10^{-1}$	$9.922280\times10^{-1}$	$6.850\times10^{-6}$
0	$5.553666\times10^{-1}$	$5.553666\times10^{-1}$	$2.417\times10^{-7}$	$7.724818\times10^{-1}$	7.724813 $\times10^{-1}$	$4.934\times10^{-7}$	$9.221826\times10^{-1}$	$9.221826\times10^{-1}$	$3.423\times10^{-8}$
3	$9.150444\times10^{-1}$	$9.150445\times10^{-1}$	$4.741\times10^{-8}$	$9.669729\times10^{-1}$	9.669732 $\times10^{-1}$	$2.824\times10^{-7}$	$9.903092\times10^{-1}$	$9.903095\times10^{-1}$	$2.634\times10^{-7}$
7	$9.944820\times10^{-1}$	$9.944821\times10^{-1}$	$3.521\times10^{-8}$	$9.979629\times10^{-1}$	9.979630 $\times10^{-1}$	$6.559\times10^{-8}$	$9.994155\times10^{-1}$	$9.994155\times10^{-1}$	$3.733\times10^{-8}$
10	$9.993204\times10^{-1}$	$9.993204\times10^{-1}$	$6.943\times10^{-10}$	$9.997499\times10^{-1}$	9.997477 $\times10^{-1}$	$7.674\times10^{-10}$	$9.999283\times10^{-1}$	$9.999283\times10^{-1}$	$3.684\times10^{-10}$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 4.

$L_{\infty}$ norm of problem 1 for case

$(i)$ with various values of

$\eta$ .

	$\eta=0.25$		${\eta=0.5}$		$\eta=0.75$
$t$	Present	^[44]	Present	^[44]	Present	^[44]
0.01	$4\times10^{-9}$	$5\times10^{-8}$	$7\times10^{-11}$	$5\times10^{-8}$	$4\times10^{-10}$	$5\times10^{-8}$
0.1	$3\times10^{-8}$	$3\times10^{-7}$	$4\times10^{-9}$	$3\times10^{-7}$	$3\times10^{-8}$	$3\times10^{-7}$
1.0	$1\times10^{-7}$	$1\times10^{-6}$	$6\times10^{-9}$	$5\times10^{-7}$	$1\times10^{-7}$	$1\times10^{-6}$
$L_{2}$
	$\eta=0.25$		${\eta=0.5}$		$\eta=0.75$
$t$	Present	^[44]	Present	^[44]	Present	^[44]
0.01	$5\times10^{-8}$	$5\times10^{-8}$	$8\times10^{-10}$	$5\times10^{-8}$	$5\times10^{-9}$	$5\times10^{-8}$
0.1	$4\times10^{-7}$	$3\times10^{-7}$	$4\times10^{-8}$	$3\times10^{-7}$	$4\times10^{-7}$	$3\times10^{-7}$
1.0	$2\times10^{-6}$	$1\times10^{-6}$	$7\times10^{-8}$	$5\times10^{-7}$	$2\times10^{-7}$	$9\times10^{-7}$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

In these tables, the obtained solutions are compared with the existing results in the literature ^{[32,42,43,44]}. Through comparison, it is obvious that the present technique shows better performance than the cited work ^[32,42,44]. The present method is based on RK-4 which gives good results using a small step size.

In , the computed values of the constants $\mathcal{K}_{1}, \mathcal{K}_{2}, \mathcal{K}_{3}, \mbox{and}\; \mathcal{K}_{4},$ for $\eta$ = 0.75, $\partial$ t = 0.001, and $L$ = 2 in the spatial domain $[-10, 10]$ at distinct time levels are reported.

Table 5. The coefficients values

$\mathcal{K}_{1}, \mathcal{K}_{2}, \mathcal{K}_{3}, \mbox{and}\; \mathcal{K}_{4}$ of problem 1 for case

$(i)$ with

$\eta = 0.75$ ,

$\partial t = 0.001$ , and

$L = 2$ .

$t$	$\mathcal{K}_1$	$\mathcal{K}_2$	$\mathcal{K}_3$	$\mathcal{K}_4$	Exact solution	Approximate Solution
0.1	$-0.000550127435708$	$-0.000550134504350$	-0.000550134504441	$-0.000550141573170$	$0.002000842010538$	0.001998228498937
	$-0.003944143032133$	$-0.003944200185466$	-0.003944200186294	$-0.003944257340322$	$0.011607626920875$	0.011488174877494
	$-0.013201078042744$	$-0.013201383972046$	-0.013201383979136	$-0.013201689914171$	$0.064365301508760$	0.064570374111189
	$-0.051365677465119$	$-0.051368265656579$	-0.051368265786992	$-0.051370854097156$	$0.287228366819168$	0.287197745055223
	$-0.051813540724938$	$-0.051816722723024$	-0.051816722918439	$-0.051819905116762$	$0.702427327811607$	0.702470418192179
	$-0.017916749446516$	$-0.017917560559869$	-0.017917560596589	$-0.017918371748347$	$0.932557185568827$	0.932334691176706
	$-0.001827678052741$	$-0.001827749308296$	-0.001827749311074	$-0.001827820569427$	$0.987804495301507$	0.987929599908556
	$-0.000469739827336$	$-0.000469757565601$	-0.000469757566270	$-0.000469775305206$	$0.997896788384635$	0.997899530906305
0.5	$-0.000577059786102$	$-0.000577067177572$	-0.000577067177666	$-0.000577074569228$	$0.001810781501093$	0.001767463721627
	$-0.003051640090534$	$-0.003051683586188$	-0.003051683586808	$-0.003051727083001$	$0.010514629756167$	0.010105627339338
	$-0.013080724367551$	$-0.013081016714371$	-0.013081016720905	$-0.013081309072915$	$0.058599062346241$	0.059295267046785
	$-0.048329726367191$	$-0.048332073109897$	-0.048332073223848	$-0.048334420069440$	$0.267198413052228$	0.267262778290452
	$-0.053763565954023$	$-0.053766904699846$	-0.053766904907184	$-0.053770243864621$	$0.681111275379947$	0.681347627307882
	$-0.019155289006543$	$-0.019156170889244$	-0.019156170929845	$-0.019157052855031$	$0.925989123684090$	0.924926841938356
	$-0.002566491484946$	$-0.002566591819423$	-0.002566591823345	$-0.002566692161784$	$0.986539147932092$	0.987046273168589
	$-0.000386965519072$	$-0.000386980139663$	-0.000386980140215	$-0.000386994761360$	$0.997676105725876$	0.997732428060447
1.0	$-0.000492580802813$	$-0.000492587089040$	-0.000492587089121	-0.000492593375426	0.001598349150613	0.001497994290761
	$-0.002423286399790$	$-0.002423320374624$	-0.002423320375100	-0.002423354350360	0.009290606750817	0.008752036768966
	$-0.012362148938809$	$-0.012362412752656$	-0.012362412758286	$-0.012362676576548$	0.052072036738247	0.052916126005743
	$-0.044718979445185$	$-0.044721048624543$	-0.044721048720285	$-0.044723117985214$	0.243445131323980	0.244007643848355
	$-0.055982628284796$	$-0.055986143692980$	-0.055986143913729	$-0.055989659546008$	0.653369506436006	0.653900188317205
	$-0.020946593575349$	$-0.020947579113019$	-0.020947579159389	$-0.020948564745616$	0.916953070453016	0.914910265106938
	$-0.003363560269563$	$-0.003363692368992$	-0.003363692374180	$-0.003363824478866$	0.984774145473912	0.985560005959086
	$-0.000411345006904$	$-0.000411360558612$	-0.000411360559200	$-0.000411376111496$	0.997367497354861	0.997536946415740

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

In , numerical and exact solutions are plotted for various values of $\eta$ for case $(i)$ while in , the absolute error at distinct points are plotted with various time levels. Similar simulations are obtained for case ( $ii$ ) and its absolute error at distinct points are compared with the existing results ^[33,45,46] in Table 6, which show the superiority of the method.

Figure 1. Exact and numerical measures of problem 1 for case

$(i)$ . The arrow shows the direction of the travelling wave.

	$t=0.001$				$t=0.002$				$t=0.003$
$\xi$	^[45]	^[46]	^[33]	Present	^[45]	^[46]	^[33]	Present	^[45]	^[46]	^[33]	Present
-22	$1.680\times10^{-7}$	$1.367\times10^{-7}$	$1.435\times10^{-7}$	$2.139\times10^{-10}$	$3.362\times10^{-7}$	2.888 $\times10^{-7}$	$2.955\times10^{-7}$	$3.158\times10^{-10}$	$5.045\times10^{-7}$	$4.561\times10^{-7}$	$4.097\times10^{-7}$	$3.955\times10^{-10}$
-6	$5.184\times10^{-6}$	$4.611\times10^{-6}$	$4.844\times10^{-7}$	$4.987\times10^{-6}$	$1.037\times10^{-5}$	9.740 $\times10^{-6}$	$9.990\times10^{-6}$	$9.980\times10^{-6}$	$1.556\times10^{-5}$	$1.538\times10^{-5}$	$1.567\times10^{-5}$	$1.497\times10^{-5}$
2	$2.956\times10^{-5}$	$2.669\times10^{-5}$	$2.751\times10^{-5}$	$2.924\times10^{-5}$	$5.915\times10^{-5}$	5.633 $\times10^{-5}$	$5.811\times10^{-5}$	$5.847\times10^{-5}$	$8.876\times10^{-5}$	$8.875\times10^{-5}$	$8.620\times10^{-5}$	$8.768\times10^{-5}$
10	$1.073\times10^{-6}$	$9.152\times10^{-7}$	$1.006\times10^{-7}$	$5.511\times10^{-7}$	$2.146\times10^{-6}$	1.931 $\times10^{-6}$	$2.011\times10^{-6}$	$1.101\times10^{-6}$	$3.218\times10^{-6}$	$3.047\times10^{-6}$	$4.992\times10^{-6}$	$1.651\times10^{-6}$
18	$5.458\times10^{-7}$	$4.272\times10^{-7}$	$5.130\times10^{-7}$	$6.036\times10^{-9}$	$1.091\times10^{-6}$	9.016 $\times10^{-7}$	$9.215\times10^{-7}$	$1.206\times10^{-8}$	$1.636\times10^{-6}$	$1.423\times10^{-6}$	$1.610\times10^{-6}$	$1.808\times10^{-8}$

	$\partial t=10^{-4}$		$\partial t=10^{-5}$
$t$	Present	^[44]	Present	^[44]
0.01	$4\times10^{-8}$	$2\times10^{-7}$	$6\times10^{-9}$	$2\times10^{-7}$
0.1	$3\times10^{-7}$	$9\times10^{-7}$	$4\times10^{-8}$	$9\times10^{-7}$
10.0	$9\times10^{-8}$	$3\times10^{-7}$	$7\times10^{-9}$	$3\times10^{-7}$
$L_{2}$
	$\partial t=10^{-4}$		$\partial t=10^{-5}$
$t$	Present	^[44]		Present	^[44]
0.01	$2\times10^{-7}$	$1\times10^{-7}$	$3\times10^{-8}$	$1\times10^{-7}$
0.1	$1\times10^{-6}$	$6\times10^{-7}$	$2\times10^{-7}$	$6\times10^{-7}$
10.0	$3\times10^{-7}$	$2\times10^{-7}$	$4\times10^{-8}$	$2\times10^{-7}$

	$\eta=-1$			$\eta=0.75$			$\eta=4$
$t$	$L_{\infty}$	$L_{2}$	$L_{rms}$	$L_{\infty}$	$L_{2}$	$L_{rms}$	$L_{\infty}$	$L_{2}$	$L_{rms}$
0.1	$9.677\times10^{-7}$	$4.969\times10^{-6}$	$5.559\times10^{-8}$	$7.961\times10^{-7}$	4.699 $\times10^{-6}$	$9.270\times10^{-9}$	$3.662\times10^{-6}$	$1.361\times10^{-5}$	$1.464\times10^{-7}$
0.2	$1.890\times10^{-6}$	$9.619\times10^{-6}$	$1.166\times10^{-7}$	$1.514\times10^{-76}$	8.965 $\times10^{-6}$	$1.950\times10^{-8}$	$7.200\times10^{-6}$	$2.596\times10^{-5}$	$3.349\times10^{-7}$
0.3	$2.773\times10^{-6}$	$1.399\times10^{-5}$	$1.834\times10^{-7}$	$2.168\times10^{-6}$	1.286 $\times10^{-5}$	$3.081\times10^{-8}$	$1.042\times10^{-6}$	$3.687\times10^{-5}$	$5.497\times10^{-7}$
0.4	$3.617\times10^{-6}$	$1.814\times10^{-5}$	$2.555\times10^{-7}$	$2.771\times10^{-6}$	1.643 $\times10^{-5}$	$4.330\times10^{-8}$	$1.320\times10^{-5}$	$4.624\times10^{-5}$	$7.665\times10^{-7}$
0.5	$4.424\times10^{-6}$	$2.208\times10^{-5}$	$3.325\times10^{-7}$	$3.326\times10^{-6}$	1.973 $\times10^{-5}$	$5.702\times10^{-8}$	$1.544\times10^{-5}$	$5.399\times10^{-5}$	$9.573\times10^{-7}$
1.0	$7.881\times10^{-6}$	$3.949\times10^{-5}$	$7.631\times10^{-7}$	$5.641\times10^{-6}$	3.310 $\times10^{-5}$	$1.460\times10^{-7}$	$1.650\times10^{-5}$	$6.607\times10^{-5}$	$9.066\times10^{-7}$
1.5	$1.031\times10^{-5}$	$5.316\times10^{-5}$	$1.186\times10^{-7}$	$7.452\times10^{-6}$	4.300 $\times10^{-5}$	$2.707\times10^{-7}$	$8.097\times10^{-6}$	$2.564\times10^{-5}$	$1.411\times10^{-7}$
2.0	$1.168\times10^{-5}$	$6.187\times10^{-5}$	$1.525\times10^{-6}$	$8.979\times10^{-6}$	5.088 $\times10^{-5}$	$4.305\times10^{-7}$	$5.428\times10^{-6}$	$1.746\times10^{-5}$	$3.026\times10^{-7}$

		$\eta=-1$			$\eta=1$			$\eta=0.75$
$t$	L	$L_{\infty}$	$L_{2}$	$L_{rms}$	$L_{\infty}$	$L_{2}$	$L_{rms}$	$L_{\infty}$	$L_{2}$	$L_{rms}$
0.01	1	$2.145\times10^{-4}$	$2.173\times10^{-4}$	$6.515\times10^{-5}$	$2.022\times10^{-4}$	2.049 $\times10^{-4}$	$6.193\times10^{-5}$	$2.307\times10^{-4}$	$2.064\times10^{-4}$	$6.232\times10^{-5}$
	3	$3.599\times10^{-5}$	$5.573\times10^{-5}$	$9.275\times10^{-6}$	$3.319\times10^{-5}$	5.171 $\times10^{-5}$	$8.652\times10^{-6}$	$3.352\times10^{-5}$	$5.219\times10^{-5}$	$8.727\times10^{-6}$
	5	$2.625\times10^{-6}$	$8.187\times10^{-6}$	$6.643\times10^{-7}$	$2.234\times10^{-6}$	7.016 $\times10^{-6}$	$5.751\times10^{-7}$	$2.281\times10^{-6}$	$7.155\times10^{-6}$	$5.857\times10^{-7}$
	7	$3.131\times10^{-7}$	$1.946\times10^{-6}$	$7.687\times10^{-8}$	$9.539\times10^{-8}$	5.991 $\times10^{-7}$	$2.520\times10^{-8}$	$1.209\times10^{-7}$	$7.573\times10^{-7}$	$3.128\times10^{-8}$
0.1	1	$2.132\times10^{-3}$	$2.288\times10^{-3}$	$8.423\times10^{-4}$	$1.142\times10^{-3}$	1.270 $\times10^{-3}$	$4.984\times10^{-4}$	$1.228\times10^{-3}$	$1.359\times10^{-3}$	$5.304\times10^{-4}$
	3	$2.519\times10^{-4}$	$5.146\times10^{-4}$	$9.770\times10^{-5}$	$1.177\times10^{-4}$	2.562 $\times10^{-4}$	$5.065\times10^{-5}$	$1.284\times10^{-4}$	$2.774\times10^{-4}$	$5.461\times10^{-5}$
	5	$1.753\times10^{-5}$	$7.158\times10^{-5}$	$6.734\times10^{-6}$	$7.536\times10^{-6}$	3.263 $\times10^{-5}$	$3.211\times10^{-6}$	$8.298\times10^{-6}$	$3.571\times10^{-5}$	$3.497\times10^{-6}$
	7	$2.065\times10^{-6}$	$1.679\times10^{-5}$	$7.777\times10^{-7}$	$3.194\times10^{-7}$	2.818 $\times10^{-6}$	$1.422\times10^{-7}$	$4.636\times10^{-7}$	$3.783\times10^{-6}$	$1.870\times10^{-7}$
0.2	1	$5.512\times10^{-3}$	$6.009\times10^{-3}$	$2.238\times10^{-3}$	$1.147\times10^{-3}$	1.763 $\times10^{-3}$	$7.469\times10^{-4}$	$1.693\times10^{-3}$	$2.009\times10^{-3}$	$8.449\times10^{-4}$
	3	$6.614\times10^{-4}$	$1.396\times10^{-3}$	$2.723\times10^{-4}$	$1.335\times10^{-4}$	3.243 $\times10^{-4}$	$6.846\times10^{-5}$	$1.565\times10^{-4}$	$3.765\times10^{-4}$	$7.901\times10^{-5}$
	5	$4.613\times10^{-5}$	$1.948\times10^{-4}$	$1.887\times10^{-5}$	$8.413\times10^{-6}$	4.091 $\times10^{-5}$	$4.311\times10^{-6}$	$9.990\times10^{-6}$	$4.802\times10^{-5}$	$5.027\times10^{-6}$
	7	$5.276\times10^{-6}$	$4.482\times10^{-5}$	$2.163\times10^{-6}$	$3.610\times10^{-7}$	3.597 $\times10^{-6}$	$1.931\times10^{-7}$	$5.271\times10^{-7}$	$5.111\times10^{-6}$	$2.695\times10^{-7}$
0.3	1	$1.295\times10^{-2}$	$1.394\times10^{-2}$	$4.660\times10^{-3}$	$1.537\times10^{-3}$	1.926 $\times10^{-3}$	$8.404\times10^{-4}$	$1.886\times10^{-3}$	$2.331\times10^{-3}$	$1.008\times10^{-3}$
	3	$1.796\times10^{-3}$	$3.661\times10^{-3}$	$6.980\times10^{-4}$	$1.295\times10^{-4}$	3.375 $\times10^{-4}$	$7.358\times10^{-5}$	$1.636\times10^{-4}$	$4.182\times10^{-4}$	$9.059\times10^{-5}$
	5	$1.306\times10^{-4}$	$5.218\times10^{-4}$	$4.930\times10^{-5}$	$8.177\times10^{-6}$	4.242 $\times10^{-5}$	$4.621\times10^{-6}$	$1.040\times10^{-5}$	$5.313\times10^{-5}$	$5.748\times10^{-6}$
	7	$1.400\times10^{-5}$	$1.144\times10^{-4}$	$5.458\times10^{-6}$	$3.564\times10^{-7}$	3.791 $\times10^{-6}$	$2.094\times10^{-7}$	$5.505\times10^{-7}$	$5.677\times10^{-6}$	$3.088\times10^{-7}$
0.4	1	$3.446\times10^{-2}$	$3.905\times10^{-2}$	$7.273\times10^{-3}$	$1.487\times10^{-3}$	1.917 $\times10^{-3}$	$8.488\times10^{-4}$	$1.941\times10^{-3}$	$2.461\times10^{-3}$	$1.080\times10^{-3}$
	3	$7.093\times10^{-3}$	$1.220\times10^{-2}$	$2.140\times10^{-3}$	$1.211\times10^{-4}$	3.264 $\times10^{-4}$	$7.239\times10^{-5}$	$1.616\times10^{-4}$	$4.305\times10^{-4}$	$9.485\times10^{-5}$
	5	$5.414\times10^{-4}$	$1.867\times10^{-3}$	$1.605\times10^{-4}$	$7.588\times10^{-6}$	4.095 $\times10^{-5}$	$4.540\times10^{-6}$	$1.029\times10^{-5}$	$5.458\times10^{-5}$	$6.009\times10^{-6}$
	7	$5.169\times10^{-5}$	$3.698\times10^{-4}$	$1.635\times10^{-5}$	$3.368\times10^{-7}$	3.721 $\times10^{-6}$	$2.085\times10^{-7}$	$5.465\times10^{-7}$	$5.851\times10^{-6}$	$3.236\times10^{-7}$
0.5	1	$1.921\times10^{-1}$	$2.391\times10^{-1}$	$5.616\times10^{-1}$	$1.386\times10^{-3}$	1.821 $\times10^{-3}$	$8.130\times10^{-4}$	$1.921\times10^{-3}$	$2.477\times10^{-3}$	$1.095\times10^{-3}$
	3	$6.222\times10^{-2}$	$7.995\times10^{-2}$	$1.088\times10^{-2}$	$1.103\times10^{-4}$	3.042 $\times10^{-4}$	$6.809\times10^{-5}$	$1.570\times10^{-4}$	$4.261\times10^{-4}$	$9.479\times10^{-5}$
	5	$7.028\times10^{-3}$	$1.727\times10^{-2}$	$1.144\times10^{-3}$	$6.897\times10^{-6}$	3.813 $\times10^{-5}$	$4.268\times10^{-6}$	$9.935\times10^{-6}$	$5.395\times10^{-5}$	$5.999\times10^{-6}$
	7	$5.741\times10^{-4}$	$2.903\times10^{-3}$	$9.948\times10^{-5}$	$3.121\times10^{-7}$	3.525 $\times10^{-6}$	$1.990\times10^{-7}$	$5.295\times10^{-7}$	$5.804\times10^{-6}$	$3.139\times10^{-7}$

[1]	K Aabed, M M.A. Lashin, An analytical study of the factors that influence Covid-19 spread, Saudi J Biol Sci, 28 (2021), 1177–1195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2020.11.067 doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2020.11.067
[2]	J A E Andersson, J Gillis, G Horn, J B Rawlings, M Diehl, Casadi–A software framework for nonlinear optimization and optimal control, Math Program Comput, 11 (2019), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12532-018-0139-4 doi: 10.1007/s12532-018-0139-4
[3]	C Baunez, M Degoulet, S Luchini, P A Pintus, M Teschl, An early assessment of curfew and second Covid-19 lock-down on virus propagation in france, medRxiv [Preprint], (2020), [cited 2024 May 14]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.11.20230243
[4]	N Bellomo, R Bingham, M A J Chaplain, G Dosi, G Forni, D A Knopoff, et al., A multiscale model of virus pandemic: heterogeneous interactive entities in a globally connected world, Math. Mod. Meth. Appl. S, 30 (2020), 1591–1651. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218202520500323 doi: 10.1142/S0218202520500323
[5]	M Bicher, N Popper, Agent-based derivation of the sir-differential equations, 2013 8th EUROSIM Congress on Modelling and Simulation, 2013,306–311.
[6]	L Bolzoni, E Bonacini, C Soresina, M Groppi, Time-optimal control strategies in sir epidemic models, Math Biosci, 292 (2017), 86–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mbs.2017.07.011 doi: 10.1016/j.mbs.2017.07.011
[7]	A Bressan, B Piccoli, Introduction to the mathematical theory of control, Springfield: American institute of mathematical sciences, 2007.
[8]	T Britton, F Ball, P Trapman, A mathematical model reveals the influence of population heterogeneity on herd immunity to SARS-CoV-2, Science, 369 (2020), 846–849. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abc6810 doi: 10.1126/science.abc6810
[9]	US Census Bureau, Survey of income and program participation (SIPP), 2022. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/sipp.html.
[10]	C Conover, How economists calculate the costs and benefits of Covid-19 lockdowns, Forbes, 2020. Available from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2020/03/27/how-economists-calculate-the-costs-and-benefits-of-covid-19-lockdowns/?sh = 44a20e846f63.
[11]	Y Chen, P Lu, C Chang, T Liu, A time-dependent SIR model for Covid-19 with undetectable infected persons, IEEE Trans. Network Sci. Eng., 7 (2020), 3279–3294.
[12]	G Cho, Y J Kim, S Seo, G Jang, H Lee, Cost-effectiveness analysis of Covid-19 variants effects in an age-structured model, Sci. Rep., 13 (2023), 15844. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41876-x doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-41876-x
[13]	M Chyba, T Klotz, Y Mileyko, C Shanbrom, A look at endemic equilibria of compartmental epidemiological models and model control via vaccination and mitigation, Math. Control Signals Syst., (2023), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00498-023-00365-2
[14]	A T Ciota, L D Kramer, Vector-virus interactions and transmission dynamics of west nile virus, Viruses, 5 (2013), 3021–3047. https://doi.org/10.3390/v5123021 doi: 10.3390/v5123021
[15]	K Dietz, The estimation of the basic reproduction number for infectious diseases, Stat Methods Med Res, 2 (1993), 23–41.
[16]	R Donnelly, H A Patrinos, Learning loss during Covid-19: An early systematic review, Prospects, 51 (2021), 601–609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-021-09582-6 doi: 10.1007/s11125-021-09582-6
[17]	E Dorn, B Hancock, J Sarakatsannis, E Viruleg, Covid-19 and learning loss—disparities grow and students need help. McKinsey & Company, 2020. Available from: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-sector/our-insights/covid-19-and-learning-loss-disparities-grow-and-students-need-help.
[18]	D Fanelli, F Piazza, Analysis and forecast of Covid-19 spreading in china, Italy and france, Chaos Solitons Fractals, 134 (2020), 109761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2020.109761 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2020.109761
[19]	A S Fauci, The aids epidemic—considerations for the 21st century, New Engl J Med., 341 (1999), 1046–1050. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199909303411406 doi: 10.1056/NEJM199909303411406
[20]	G. Giordano, F. Blanchini, R. Bruno, P. Colaneri, A. D. Filippo, A. D. Matteo, et al., Modelling the Covid-19 epidemic and implementation of population-wide interventions in Italy, Nat Med, 26 (2020), 855–860. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0883-7 doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-0883-7
[21]	L. O Gostin, D Lucey, A Phelan, The ebola epidemic: a global health emergency, JAMA, 312 (2014), 1095–1096.
[22]	C. Gunaratne, R. Reyes, E. Hemberg, UM O'Reilly, Evaluating efficacy of indoor non-pharmaceutical interventions against Covid-19 outbreaks with a coupled spatial-SIR agent-based simulation framework, Sci. Rep., 12 (2022), 6202. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-09942-y doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-09942-y
[23]	S Hammerstein, C König, T Dreisörner, A Frey, Effects of Covid-19-related school closures on student achievement-a systematic review, Front. Psychol., 12 (2021), 746289. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.746289 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.746289
[24]	J K Hammitt, Valuing mortality risk in the time of Covid-19, J Risk Uncertain, 61 (2020), 129–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-020-09338-1 doi: 10.1007/s11166-020-09338-1
[25]	X Huang, X Shao, L Xing, Y Hu, D D. Sin, X Zhang, The impact of lockdown timing on Covid-19 transmission across us counties, EClinicalMedicine, 38 (2021), 101035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101035 doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101035
[26]	V Kala, K Guo, E Swantek, A Tong, M. Chyba, Y Mileyko, et al., Pandemics in hawaii: 1918 influenza and Covid-19, The Ninth International Conference on Global Health Challenges, 2020.
[27]	W. O. Kermack, A. G. McKendrick, Contributions to the mathematical theory of epidemics. Ⅱ.—The problem of endemicity, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 138 (1932), 55–83. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1932.0171 doi: 10.1098/rspa.1932.0171
[28]	M. L. King, M. Tertilt, IPUMS-CPS: An integrated version of the march current population survey, 1962–2002, Hist. Methods, 36 (2003), 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/01615440309601213 doi: 10.1080/01615440309601213
[29]	J. M. Kirigia, R. N. D. K. Muthuri, The fiscal value of human lives lost from coronavirus disease (Covid-19) in China, BMC Res. Notes, 13 (2020), 198. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-020-05044-y doi: 10.1186/s13104-020-05044-y
[30]	N. Kousar, R. Mahmood, M. Ghalib, A numerical study of SIR epidemic model, Int. J. Sci.: Basic Appl. Res., 25 (2016), 354–363.
[31]	A. J. Krener, H. Schättler, The structure of small-time reachable sets in low dimensions, SIAM J. Control Optim., 27 (1989), 120–147. https://doi.org/10.1137/0327008 doi: 10.1137/0327008
[32]	J. S. Kutter, M. I. Spronken, P. L. Fraaij, R. A. M. Fouchier, S. Herfst, Transmission routes of respiratory viruses among humans, Curr. Opin. Virol., 28 (2018), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coviro.2018.01.001 doi: 10.1016/j.coviro.2018.01.001
[33]	K. Y. Leung, P. Trapman, T. Britton, Who is the infector? Epidemic models with symptomatic and asymptomatic cases, Math. Biosci., 301 (2018), 190–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mbs.2018.04.002 doi: 10.1016/j.mbs.2018.04.002
[34]	C. Lobry, Contro labilite des syste mes non lineaires, SIAM J. Control Optim., 8 (1970), 573. https://doi.org/10.1137/0308042 doi: 10.1137/0308042
[35]	Q. Luo, R. Weightman, S. T. McQuade, M. DÍaz, E. Trélat, W. Barbour, et al., Optimization of vaccination for Covid-19 in the midst of a pandemic, Netw. Heterog. Media, 17 (2022), 443–466. https://doi.org/10.3934/nhm.2022016 doi: 10.3934/nhm.2022016
[36]	S. T. McQuade, R. Weightman, N. J. Merrill, A. Yadav, E. Trélat, S. R. Allred, et al., Control of Covid-19 outbreak using an extended seir model, Math. Mod. Meth. Appl. S., 31 (2021), 2399–2424. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218202521500512 doi: 10.1142/S0218202521500512
[37]	M. Miller, 2019 novel coronavirus Covid-19 (2019-nCoV) data repository: Johns hopkins university center for systems science and engineering, Assoc. Can. Map Lib. Arch. Bull., 164 (2020), 47–51. https://doi.org/10.15353/acmla.n164.1730 doi: 10.15353/acmla.n164.1730
[38]	B. W. Mol, J. Karnon, Strict lockdown versus flexible social distance strategy for Covid-19 disease: A cost-effectiveness analysis, Arch. Clin. Biomed. Res., 7 (2023), 58–63. https://doi.org/10.26502/acbr.50170319 doi: 10.26502/acbr.50170319
[39]	Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Weekly updates by select demographic and geographic characteristics, National Center for Health Statistics, 2021. Available from: file:///C:/Users/mabin/Desktop/cdc_105341_DS1.pdf.
[40]	World Health Organization, Statement on the second meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), 2020. Available from: https://www.who.int/zh/news/item/30-01-2020-statement-on-the-second-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov).
[41]	K. Prem, A. R. Cook, M. Jit, Projecting social contact matrices in 152 countries using contact surveys and demographic data, PLoS Comput. Biol., 13 (2017), e1005697. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005697 doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005697
[42]	H. E. Rodriguez, Collecting Covid-19: Documenting the CDC response, Collections, 17 (2021), 102–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/1550190620980411 doi: 10.1177/1550190620980411
[43]	M. Roy, R. D. Holt, Effects of predation on host–pathogen dynamics in SIR models, Theor. Popul. Biol., 73 (2008), 319–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tpb.2007.12.008 doi: 10.1016/j.tpb.2007.12.008
[44]	C. A. Stafford, G. P. Walker, D. E. Ullman, Hitching a ride: Vector feeding and virus transmission, Commun. Integr. Biol., 5 (2012), 43–49. https://doi.org/10.4161/cib.18640 doi: 10.4161/cib.18640
[45]	R. M. Viner, S. J. Russell, H. Croker, J. Packer, J. Ward, C. Stansfield, et al., School closure and management practices during coronavirus outbreaks including Covid-19: A rapid systematic review, Lancet Child Adolesc., 4 (2020), 397–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30095-X doi: 10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30095-X
[46]	A. Wächter, L. T. Biegler, On the implementation of an interior-point filter line-search algorithm for large-scale nonlinear programming, Math. Program., 106 (2006), 25–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107-004-0559-y doi: 10.1007/s10107-004-0559-y
[47]	S. H. Waterman, D. J. Gubler, Dengue fever, Clin. Dermatol., 7 (1989), 117–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/0738-081x(89)90034-5
[48]	R. Weightman, Age based control github repository, PLabCOVIDModeling, 2023. Available from: https://t.ly/Ms8C_.
[49]	R. Weightman, B. Piccoli, Optimization of non-pharmaceutical interventions for a mutating virus, 2023 American Control Conference (ACC), San Diego: IEEE, (2023), 307–312. https://doi.org/10.23919/ACC55779.2023.10156293
[50]	Q. Wen, J. Yang, T. Luo, First case of Covid-19 in the united states, N. Engl. J. Med., 382 (2020), e53. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2004794 doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2004794
[51]	Worldometer, Cases and deaths from Covid-19 virus pandemic, 2020. Available from: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/.
[52]	O. Zakary, M. Rachik, I. Elmouki, On the impact of awareness programs in HIV/AIDS prevention: An SIR model with optimal control, Int. J. Comput. Appl., 133 (2016), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5120/ijca2016908030 doi: 10.5120/ijca2016908030
[53]	J. Zhang, M. Litvinova, W. Wang, Y. Wang, X. Deng, X. Chen, et al., Evolving epidemiology and transmission dynamics of coronavirus disease 2019 outside Hubei province, China: A descriptive and modelling study, Lancet Infect. Dis., 20 (2020), 793–802. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30230-9 doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30230-9

	$L_{\infty}$			$L_{2}$			$L_{rms}$
$t$	Present	^[32]	^[33]	Present	^[32]	^[33]	Present	^[32]	^[33]
0.2	$5.325\times10^{-7}$	$1.235\times10^{-5}$	$1.122\times10^{-5}$	$3.626\times10^{-6}$	1.312 $\times10^{-6}$	$7.154\times10^{-6}$	$1.124\times10^{-8}$	$4.567\times10^{-5}$	....
0.5	$1.203\times10^{-6}$	$5.198\times10^{-4}$	$7.584\times10^{-5}$	$8.234\times10^{-6}$	6.099 $\times10^{-6}$	$7.489\times10^{-6}$	$6.344\times10^{-8}$	$5.642\times10^{-5}$	....
1.0	$2.158\times10^{-6}$	$6.328\times10^{-4}$	$9.127\times10^{-5}$	$1.521\times10^{-5}$	2.121 $\times10^{-5}$	$8.689\times10^{-5}$	$2.164\times10^{-7}$	$8.167\times10^{-5}$	....
1.5	$2.996\times10^{-6}$	$8.538\times10^{-4}$	$9.242\times10^{-5}$	$2.213\times10^{-5}$	$3.234\times10^{-5}$	$7.027\times10^{-5}$	$4.160\times10^{-7}$	$2.368\times10^{-4}$	....

Networks and Heterogeneous Media

Optimal control of pandemics via a sociodemographic model of non-pharmaceutical interventions

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Main motive

3. Haar wavelet and its integrals

4. Proposed scheme

4.1. Temporal discretization

5. Simulations and comparison

5.1. Problem 1

5.2. Problem 2

6. Stability analysis

7. Concluding remarks

Author contributions

Use of AI tools declaration

Acknowledgments

Conflict of interest

References

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Figures and Tables

Other Articles By Authors

Related pages

Tools

Export File

Citation

Format

Content

Catalog