AAA Abstract and Applied Analysis 1687-0409 1085-3375 Hindawi Publishing Corporation 757204 10.1155/2014/757204 757204 Research Article Two Hybrid Methods for Solving Two-Dimensional Linear Time-Fractional Partial Differential Equations Jacobs B. A. Harley C. Bhrawy Ali H. Centre for Differential Equations Continuum Mechanics and Applications School of Computational and Applied Mathematics University of the Witwatersrand (Wits) Private Bag 3, Johannesburg 2050 South Africa wits.ac.za 2014 842014 2014 22 01 2014 11 03 2014 12 03 2014 8 4 2014 2014 Copyright © 2014 B. A. Jacobs and C. Harley. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

A computationally efficient hybridization of the Laplace transform with two spatial discretization techniques is investigated for numerical solutions of time-fractional linear partial differential equations in two space variables. The Chebyshev collocation method is compared with the standard finite difference spatial discretization and the absolute error is obtained for several test problems. Accurate numerical solutions are achieved in the Chebyshev collocation method subject to both Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions. The solution obtained by these hybrid methods allows for the evaluation at any point in time without the need for time-marching to a particular point in time.

1. Introduction

In recent years, fractional derivatives and fractional partial differential equations (FPDEs) have received great attention both in analysis and application (see  and references therein). In spite of this, there has been very little work done on solving FPDEs on a bounded domain. Agrawal  makes use of the Laplace transform and the finite sine transform to obtain an analytic solution to the fractional diffusion-wave equation on a bounded domain. Many authors have applied He’s variational iterative method (VIM)  to FPDEs with great success. However, like the differential transform method  (DTM) and Adomian decomposition method  (ADM), VIM assumes the FPDE to lie on an infinite domain.

A great deal of work on hybrid techniques has been presented where the Laplace transform is coupled with Legendre wavelets, ADM, VIM . Yin et al.  also couple the VIM with Legendre wavelets for the solution of nonlinear PDEs. Song et al.  compare the results obtained by the fractional VIM and ADM concluding that the methodologies are similar; however, the VIM does not require the calculation of Adomian polynomials. Atangana and Kılıçman  couple the Homotopy perturbation method (HPM) with the Sumudu transform, an integral transform similar to the Laplace transform, to obtain solutions to certain nonlinear heat-like FPDEs. Bhrawy et al. have contributed a considerable effort to the field, focusing on solutions to fractional differential equations via the shifted Legendre tau method and spectral methods for FPDEs . Recently, there has been a large movement toward new techniques for solving FPDEs (see ). To the best of the authors’ knowledge, these transform techniques are unable to enforce Dirichlet or Neumann boundary conditions on a bounded domain, and as such we investigate a new methodology to attempt to circumvent this.

The application of diffusion equations to images is abundant . However, the application of a time-fractional partial differential equation has not yet been thoroughly examined. Preserving the spatial topography of an image is imperative to maintaining what is deemed to be useful information in that image. It is with this application in mind that we focus on the diffusion equation in two dimensions, where the introduction of an advection term into the model would propagate information. Similarly, considering the time-fractional diffusion equation with 1 < α < 2 , we obtain the diffusion-wave equation, which again has propagational properties. We therefore restrict our choice of α to be on [ 0,1 ] . The introduction of a fractional order derivative raises the question of how to discretize or transform the derivative to produce a form that is amenable to existing techniques.

The Grünwald-Letnikov discretization has been used for numerical schemes for fractional partial differential equations  and is given by (1) D t α u ( t ) = lim Δ t 0 1 Δ t α k = 0 j ω k α u ( t - k Δ t ) , where (2) ω k α = ( - 1 ) k ( α k ) , and M Δ t = t . Computationally, this discretization becomes extremely expensive for long time simulations as each subsequent step in time is dependant on every time step that has preceded it.

The use of Laplace transform allows one to circumvent the problems that arise in the time-domain discretization. However, using the Laplace transform for the fractional order derivative presents the problem of inverting the transform to find a solution. Analytic inversion of the transform is infeasible and hence the numerical scheme for evaluating the Bromwich integral presented by Weideman and Trefethen in  is put to extensive use. The Bromwich integral is of the form (3) u ( t ) = 1 2 π i σ - i σ + i e s t U ( s ) d s , σ > σ 0 , where σ 0 is the convergence abscissa. Using the parabolic conformal map (4) s = μ ( i w + 1 ) 2 , - < w < , equation (3) becomes (5) u ( t ) = 1 2 π i - e s ( w ) t U ( s ( w ) ) s ( w ) d w which can then be approximated simply by the trapezoidal rule, or any other quadrature technique, as (6) u h ; N t ( t ) = h 2 π i k = - N t N t e s ( w k ) t U ( s ( w k ) ) s ( w k ) , w k = k h . On the parabolic contour the exponential factor in (3) forces a rapid decay in the integrand making it amenable to quadrature. All that is left is to choose the parameters h and μ optimally which is done by asymptotically balancing the truncation error and discretization errors in each of the half-planes. The methodology described by Weideman and Trefethen achieves near optimal results (see  and figures therein) and the interested reader is directed there for a thorough description of the implementation of the method. In this work, we make use of the parabolic contour due to the ease of use and the hyperbolic contour only exhibits a slight improvement in performance over the parabolic contour.

We present here an extension to the work conducted by Jacobs and Harley in . This paper extends the aforementioned work to the general form of a time-fractional parabolic partial differential equation as well as including two types of boundary conditions, Dirichlet and Neumann.

The following section introduces some preliminary definitions followed by a description of the methods employed, including the different cases for boundary conditions in Section 3. Section 5 presents the results for comparison based on three fundamentally different examples of linear FPDEs. A discussion of the results and their relationship to work beyond this research is presented in Section 6 as well as some concluding remarks.

2. Preliminaries

In this work we employ Caputo’s definition of a fractional derivative over the Riemann-Louiville derivative due to the fact that the Caputo derivative makes use of the physical boundary conditions, whereas the Riemann-Louiville derivative requires fractional order boundary conditions.

Definition 1.

The Riemann-Louiville integral of order α > 0 of a function u ( t ) is (7) J α u ( t ) = 1 Γ ( α ) 0 t ( t - τ ) α - 1 u ( τ ) d τ , x > 0 .

Definition 2.

The fractional derivative of u ( t ) according to the Caputo definition with m - 1 < α m , m , is (8) α u ( t ) t α = J m - α D m u ( t ) = D * α u ( t ) : = 1 Γ ( m - α ) 0 t ( t - τ ) m - α - 1 u ( m ) ( τ ) d τ .

If α = 1 , the Caputo fractional derivative reduces to the ordinary first order derivative. Podlubny  illustrates the pleasing property of the Laplace Transform of a Caputo derivative, as can be seen in (9). In our case, where 0 < α < 1 , we have (9) { α u ( x , y , t ) t α } = s α U ( x , y ) - s α - 1 u ( x , y , 0 ) . This property allows one to treat fractional order derivatives algebraically.

Definition 3.

The generalized Mittag-Leffler function of the argument z is (10) E α , β ( z ) = k = 0 z k Γ ( k α + β ) .

3. Methods: Semidiscrete Hybrid Transform Method

This section introduces the methodologies used for a two-dimensional FPDE, where the one-dimensional case is a simple reduction of the methods presented here.

Consider the time-fractional differential equation of the form (11) α u t α = L ( u , u x , u x x , u y , u y y ) , ( x , y ) Ω 2 with (12) u ( x , y , 0 ) = f ( x , y ) , where L is a linear function of its arguments, Ω = [ - 1,1 ] × [ - 1,1 ] to satisfy the domain required by the Chebyshev polynomials, and f ( x , y ) is a functional representation of our image data or a multivariable function. The boundary conditions may be taken to be Dirichlet or Neumann and will be discussed later. We may now apply a Laplace transform to (11) to obtain (13) s α U ( x , y ) - s α - 1 f ( x , y ) = { L ( u , u x , u x x , u y , u y y ) } , (14) s α U ( x , y ) - s α - 1 f ( x , y ) = L ( U , U x , U x x , U y , U y y ) , where (15) { u ( x , y , t ) } = U ( x , y , s ) . Boundary conditions may be in the form of Dirichlet conditions as follows: (16) u ( - 1 , y , t ) = a , u ( 1 , y , t ) = b , u ( x , - 1 , t ) = c , u ( x , 1 , t ) = d , and hence, (17) U ( - 1 , y ) = { a } , U ( 1 , y ) = { b } , (18) U ( x , - 1 ) = { c } , U ( x , 1 ) = { d } . Alternatively, Neumann boundary conditions give (19) u x ( - 1 , y , t ) = a , u x ( 1 , y , t ) = b , u y ( x , - 1 , t ) = c , u y ( x , 1 , t ) = d , with (20) U x ( - 1 , y ) = { a } , U y ( 1 , y ) = { b } , U y ( x , - 1 ) = { c } , U y ( x , 1 ) = { d } . The parameters a , b , c , and d are potentially the functions of the temporal variable and one of the spatial variables; that is, a = a ( y , t ) . Without loss of generality, we however assume that a , b , c , and d are constant.

The spatial components of this model are discretized in two ways: by Chebyshev collocation and by finite differences.

3.1. Chebyshev Collocation

Chebyshev polynomials form a basis on [ - 1,1 ] and hence we dictate the domain of our PDE to be Ω . We note here, however, that any domain in 2 can be trivially deformed to match Ω . We discretize our spatial domain using Chebyshev-Gauss-Lobatto points: (21) x i = cos ( i π N x ) , i = 0,1 , , N x ,                y j = cos ( j π N y ) ,    j = 0,1 , , N y . Note here that x 0 = 1 , x N x = - 1 , y 0 = 1 , and y N y = - 1 indicating that the domain is in essence reversed and one must use caution when imposing the boundary conditions.

Given that our input function or image has been mapped to Ω , we may assume that N x = N y ; that is, we have equal number of collocation points in each spatial direction. We now define a differentiation matrix D ( 1 ) = d k l : (22) d k l = { c k ( - 1 ) k + l c l ( x k - x l ) ,       k l , - x k 2 ( 1 - x k 2 ) ,       k = l , 1 6 ( 2 N x 2 + 1 ) ,       k = l = 0 , - 1 6 ( 2 N x 2 + 1 ) ,       k = l = N x , where       c k = { 2 ,       k = 0 , N x , 1 ,       k = 1 , , N x - 1 . Bayliss et al.  describe a method for minimizing the round-off errors incurred in the calculations of the differentiation matrix. Since we write D ( 2 ) = D ( 1 ) · D ( 1 ) , we implement the method, described in , in order to minimize propagation of round-off errors for the second derivative in space.

The derivative matrices in the x direction are (23) D ^ x ( 1 ) = D ( 1 ) ,    D ^ x ( 2 ) = D ( 2 ) , where D ( 1 ) is the Chebyshev differentiation matrix of size ( N x + 1 ) × ( N y + 1 ) .

Because we have assumed N x = N y , we derive the pleasing property that D ^ y ( 1 ) = ( D ^ x ( 1 ) ) T and D ^ y ( 2 ) = ( D ^ x ( 2 ) ) T .

Writing the discretization of (14) in matrix form yields (24) D ^ x ( 2 ) U + U D ^ y ( 2 ) - s α U = - F , where (25) F i j = s α - 1 f ( x i , y j ) . By expanding (24) in summation notation, we have (26) k = 0 N x d i k ( 2 ) U ( x k , y j ) + k = 0 N y d k j ( 2 ) U ( x i , y k ) - s α U ( x i , y j ) = - s α - 1 f ( x i , y j ) , for i = 0,1 , , N x , j = 0,1 , , N y . By extracting the first and last terms in sums, we obtain (27) d i 0 ( 2 ) U ( x 0 , y j ) + d i N x ( 2 ) U ( x N x , y j ) + d 0 j ( 2 ) U ( x i , y 0 ) + d N y j ( 2 ) U ( x i , y N y ) + k = 1 N x - 1 d i k ( 2 ) U ( x k , y j ) + k = 1 N y - 1 d k j ( 2 ) U ( x i , y k ) - s α U ( x i , y j ) = - s α - 1 f ( x i , y j ) , for i = 1 , , N x - 1 , j = 1 , , N y - 1 . We use the form of (27) to impose the boundary conditions.

The solution U ~ = { U ( x 1 , y 1 ) , U ( x 1 , y 2 ) ,    , U ( x N x - 1 , y N y - 1 ) } , which is the matrix of unknown interior points of U , can be obtained by solving the system (28) ( A ~ - s α I ) U ~ + U ~ B ~ = - F ~ , where A ~ is the matrix of interior points of D ^ x ( 2 ) and B ~ is the matrix of interior points of D ^ y ( 2 ) , so that A ~ and B ~ match the dimensions of U ~ . Also (29) F ~ i j = s α - 1 f ( x i , y j ) + d i 0 ( 2 ) U ( x 0 , y j ) + d i N x ( 2 ) U ( x N x , y j ) + d 0 j ( 2 ) U ( x i , y 0 ) + d N y j ( 2 ) U ( x i , y N y ) , for i = 1 , , N x - 1 , j = 1 , , N y - 1 . By using Kronecker tensor products, denoted by , and a lexicographic reordering, or reshaping, of U ~ and - F ~ we may write this as (30) ( ( A ~ - s α I ) I + I B ~ T ) U ~ = - F ~ , which is a linear system that is readily solved by   LinearSolve  in  Mathematica 9.

3.1.1. Dirichlet Boundary Conditions

Dirichlet boundary conditions can be imposed directly by substituting (16) into (27) and collecting all the known terms in F ~ .

3.1.2. Neumann Boundary Conditions

Neumann boundary conditions given by (17) are discretized as (31) U x ( x N x = - 1 , y j ) k = 0 N x d N x k U ( x k , y j ) = { a } , U x ( x 0 = 1 , y j ) k = 0 N x d 0 k U ( x k , y j ) = { b } . Similarly for (18), we have (32) U y ( x i , y N y = - 1 ) k = 0 N y d k N y U ( x i , y k ) = { c } , U y ( x i , y 0 = 1 ) k = 0 N y d k 0 U ( x i , y k ) = { d } . By extracting the first and last terms in the sum, the discretizations can be written as (33) ( d N x 0 d N x N x d 00 d 0 N x ) ( U ( x 0 , y j ) U ( x N x , y j ) ) = ( { a } - k = 1 N x - 1 d N x k U ( x k , y j ) { b } - k = 1 N x - 1 d 0 k U ( x k , y j ) ) , ( d 0 N y d N y N y d 00 d N y 0 ) ( U ( x i , y 0 ) U ( x i , y N y ) ) = ( { c } - k = 1 N y - 1 d k N y U ( x i , y k ) { d } - k = 1 N y - 1 d k 0 U ( x i , y k ) ) . The solutions to these linear systems are then substituted into (27).

3.2. Finite Difference Discretization

Below we make use of the following finite difference formulae: (34) U x 1 2 Δ x ( U i + 1 , j - U i - 1 , j ) , U y 1 2 Δ y ( U i , j + 1 - U i , j - 1 ) , 2 U x 2 1 Δ x 2 ( U i + 1 , j - 2 U i , j + U i - 1 , j ) , 2 U y 2 1 Δ y 2 ( U i , j + 1 - 2 U i , j + U i , - 1 j ) , where Δ x = 2 / N x and Δ y = 2 / N y .

3.2.1. Dirichlet Boundary Conditions

Discretizing (14) using a standard central-difference scheme and writing in matrix notation, we deduce (35) ( C ~ - s α I ) U ~ + U ~ D ~ = - G ~ , where C ~ and D ~ are tridiagonal matrices corresponding to the finite difference differential matrix with dimension ( N x - 1 , N y - 1 ) and (36) G ~ i j = s α - 1 f ( x i , y j ) ,    i = 1 , , N x - 1 , j = 1 , , N y - 1 . We write this as a linear system to be solved, again using  LinearSolve in Mathematica 9, as follows: (37) ( ( C ~ - s α I ) I + I D ~ T ) U ~ = - G ~ . The boundary conditions, (16), can be enforced directly onto the matrix U , where the interior points of U are U ~ .

3.2.2. Neumann Boundary Conditions

By discretizing the boundary conditions (17) and (18) using a standard central-difference scheme we derive (38) U - 1 , j = U 1 , j - 2 Δ x { a } , U N x + 1 , j = U N x - 1 , j + 2 Δ x { b } , U i , - 1 = U i , 1 - 2 Δ y { c } , U i , N y + 1 = U i , N y - 1 + 2 Δ y { d } . Including the above conditions in the matrices C and D each with dimension ( N x + 1 , N y + 1 ) we can write the entire system as (39) ( C - s α I ) U + U D = - G , where (40) G i j = s α - 1 f ( x i , y j ) ,    i = 0 , , N x , j = 0 , , N y . This may be solved as a linear system by writing (41) ( ( C - s α I ) I + I D T ) U = - G .

4. Analysis 4.1. Solvability

We have reduced all four cases to a system of linear systems, presented in (30), (37), and (41). As mentioned in the previous sections, we implemented the Mathematica solver LinearSolve, which analyzes the matrix structure and adaptively selects the most appropriate method of solution. We have compared a number of standard solution methods, such as SOR, without finding an algorithm that is faster than LinearSolve. A system M x = b has a unique solution, x = M - 1 b , provided the matrix M has an inverse M - 1 that exists. In the following analysis we denote the length in one dimension of the respective matrix M by L , since this length is scheme dependent.

Proposition 4.

If M is an irreducible diagonally dominant matrix for which | m i i | > k    =    1 k i L | m i k | for at least one i , then M is invertible .

The proof of the above proposition may be found in . All that is left is to show that our matrix M is always irreducible and satisfies Proposition 4 for some i . A useful characterization of an irreducible matrix is as follows: given a system M x = b , the matrix M is irreducible if a change in any component of b will cause a change in the solution x .

Proof.

Let M x = b and consider M x ~ = b + ϵ ; then, M ( x - x ~ ) = ϵ . Assuming x - x ~ = 0 , then M ( x - x ~ ) = 0 , a contradiction. So x x ~ and any change in b will result in a change in x . Hence M is irreducible.

4.1.1. Finite Difference Scheme

The structure of the matrix on the right-hand side of (37) and (41) reduces our diagonal dominance criterion (42) | m i i | > k    =    1 k i L | m i k | to (43) | 4 + s α | > 2 . In approximating the Bromwich integral by the trapezoidal rule, we truncate the limits of integration from ( - , ) to [ - N t , N t ] . The contour path of the integral is defined to be a parabola, denoted as s above, in the complex plane with a minimum proportional to the truncation parameter N t and inversely proportional to the final time we are integrating to, t 1 . This means that provided the ratio N t / t 1 is sufficiently large the parabola will traverse the complex space avoiding the lower bound required by the condition (43). Hence, the finite difference scheme is solvable provided one chooses parameters for the evaluation of the Bromwich integral that satisfy the above condition. An example of the above condition is illustrated in Figure 1 where the quarter-circle of radius 2 represents the lower bound required by the above condition.

Integration contour in the real-imaginary plane nonintersecting with the lower bound for α = 0.75 .

4.1.2. Chebyshev Collocation

In the case of Chebyshev collocation the solvability criterion is a little more difficult to satisfy, and hence we are only able to derive a necessary criterion that our choice of inversion parameters must satisfy. Once again the structure of (30) dictates that the condition (44) | m i i | > k    =    1 k i L | m i k | reduces to (45) | 2 d i i ( 2 ) - s α | > k    =    1 k i L 2 | d i k | . The above condition is easy to verify in practice; however, due to the dependence of the derivative matrix on the resolution parameters N x and N y , it is difficult to write a general condition in closed form. Appropriate choices of parameters in the inversion resolution ensure that the scheme is solvable as described in the previous section. Given that the derivative matrix for Chebyshev collocation is full, the right-hand side of the solvability condition (45) produces a lower bound with a much larger magnitude than in the finite difference case; moreover, the lower bound grows with N x . Examples of contours are given for N x = 5 in Figure 2 and for N x = 20 in Figure 3 illustrating the adherence of a well-constructed contour to the solvability condition (45).

Integration contour in the real-imaginary plane nonintersecting with the lower bound for α = 0.75 and N x = 5 .

Integration contour in the real-imaginary plane nonintersecting with the lower bound for α = 0.75 and N x = 20 .

4.2. Accuracy 4.2.1. Finite Difference Scheme

Theoretically, the accuracy of the method is well known to be 𝒪 ( Δ x 2 ) + 𝒪 ( Δ y 2 ) . The errors obtained in Section 5 concur with theoretical bounds.

4.2.2. Chebyshev Collocation

The work of Breuer and Everson  and Don and Solomonoff  both present arguments on the accuracy of Chebyshev collocation. In practice, the accuracy of the method is measured by numerically differentiating a function and comparing the numerical derivative with the analytic result. The results obtained in the current work are consistent with the results presented in [42, 43] obtaining very good errors for small values of N x and N y . The errors in Chebyshev collocation tend to increase rather drastically for very large values of N x contradicting the typical rule of thumb. The aforementioned work explains that while the truncation error decreases as resolution increases, the round-off errors accumulate dramatically and dominate.

5. Results Example 5 (one-dimensional time-fractional diffusion equation with homogenous Neumann boundary conditions).

We consider first the time-fractional diffusion equation in one dimension: (46) α u t α = 2 u x 2 , subject to the boundary conditions (47) u x ( - 1 , t ) = 0 ,    u x ( 1 , t ) = 0 and initial condition (48) u ( x , 0 ) = cos ( π 2 ( x + 1 ) ) . The results obtained by finite differences and Chebyshev collocation were compared to the exact solution given by Kazemi and Erjaee  as (49) u ( x , t ) = cos ( π 2 ( x + 1 ) ) ( 1 - t α E α , 1 + α ( - t α ) ) , where E α , β ( z ) is the generalized Mittag-Leffler function of the argument z . We select α = 0.8 in line with ; however, experimental results indicate that the methods are robust for virtually any value of 0 < α 1 . We note here that the domain was originally [ 0 , π ] and hence a linear transformation in the spatial variables is required to map the domain to [ - 1,1 ] , which is in accordance with the domain of the Chebyshev polynomials. The errors in the finite difference and Chebyshev schemes are tabulated in Table 1.

Figures 4 and 5 illustrate the diminishing error incurred in the process of inverting the Laplace transform. Inversion of the Laplace transform, even in the analytic case, can lead to a singularity at t = 0 . This arises in the numerical inversion and results in a relatively large error in the present schemes near t = 0 . However, this error diminishes rapidly and our schemes obtain an accurate solution.

Maximum absolute error in the presented method's solution of the problem described by Example 5 at time t = 0 . 5 .

N x Error in finite difference Error in Chebyshev collocation
5 0.009927020087821425 0.0009403962041890646
10 0.002471078174960284 2.5800430680789077 × 10 - 8
15 0.0010985435173019864 9.547918011776346 × 10 - 15
20 0.0006179865325516287 8.992806499463768 × 10 - 15

Log plot illustrating the diminishing average error in the Chebyshev collocation scheme with time for Example 5.

Log plot illustrating the diminishing average error in the finite difference scheme with time for Example 5.

Example 6 (diffusion-advection equation with Dirichlet boundary conditions).

This example considers the time-fractional diffusion-advection equation in one dimension: (50) α u t α = 2 u x 2 + u x , subject to (51) u ( - 1 , t ) = e - 1 , u ( 1 , t ) = e - 1 , u ( x , 0 ) = e - x 2 . To the authors’ knowledge, no exact solution exists for the time-fractional diffusion-advection equation. Comparing the present methods with NDSolve in Mathematica 9 yields satisfactory results for α = 1 , but no solution can be found for fractional α . We instead compare our solutions in the Laplace domain, where we obtain an exact solution to the transformed equation using DSolve in Mathematica 9. This allows one to compare the performance of the present methods for various values for α . The errors obtained, for α = 0.7 , are presented in Table 2. Given that these errors are valid in the transform domain we note that the numerical error of 𝒪 ( 8.1 2 - N t ) is incurred upon inversion of the Laplace transform, as presented by Weideman and Trefethen in  and where N t is typically 50.

Maximum absolute error in the presented method's solution of the problem described by Example 6 in the Laplace domain at s = 50 .

N x Error in finite difference Error in Chebyshev collocation
5 0.0002846591036554467 0.000031320115677323235
10 0.0003424383347704913 5.981351275385904 × 10 - 9
15 0.00028950142395197005 5.763522471780025 × 10 - 12
20 0.0002476113730374256 5.538704044016907 × 10 - 12
Example 7 (two-dimensional time-fractional diffusion equation with homogenous Dirichlet boundary conditions).

We now consider the two-dimensional time-fractional diffusion equation (52) α u t α = 2 u x 2 + 2 u y 2 , with boundary conditions (53) u ( - 1 , y , t ) = 0 ,    u ( 1 , y , t ) = 0 , u ( x , - 1 , t ) = 0 ,    u ( x , 1 , t ) = 0 and initial condition (54) u ( x , y , 0 ) = sin ( π ( x + 1 ) ) sin ( π ( y + 1 ) ) , so that the boundary conditions are consistent with the initial condition. The parameter α is taken to be 0.8. Momani  gives an exact solution as (55) u ( x , y , t ) = sin ( π ( x + 1 ) ) sin ( π ( y + 1 ) ) E α ( - 2 t α ) , where E α ( z ) = E α , 1 ( z ) is the Mittag-Leffler function of order α . The efficacy of these methods for fractional order derivatives is illustrated in Table 3.

Maximum absolute error in the presented method's solution of the problem described by Example 7 at time t = 0 . 5 .

N x Error in finite difference Error in Chebyshev collocation
5 0.038120869340055985 0.0064580077147820825
10 0.009341572386976915 8.103172060291985 × 10 - 7
15 0.004521845750043552 3.937461467984349 × 10 - 12
20 0.002567981542938025 6.517009154549669 × 10 - 13
6. Concluding Remarks

The results above strongly advocate the use of Chebyshev collocation as a spatial discretization method given the rapid error reduction with increasing spatial resolution. These hybrid methods present a robust way in which one can solve linear time-fractional partial differential equations on a bounded domain with Neumann or Dirichlet boundary conditions, particularly given discrete initial data.

Chebyshev collocation presents extremely small errors when compared to the exact solution. We use numerical experiments as substantiation of the method for applying discrete initial conditions where an exact solution may not exist. Figure 6 illustrates the decreasing error with increasing number of collocation points for the examples presented in the previous section.

Log plot illustrating the increasing accuracy with increasing collocation points for all examples.

The efficiency of the Laplace transform within the context of this hybridized method over a time-marching scheme is threefold. First, we are able to treat the fractional order derivative algebraically. The error incurred in the temporal dimension is only attributed to the evaluation of the Bromwich integral and, furthermore, this error drops off rapidly with increased resolution as illustrated in . Finally the solution obtained is a function of time so that we may evaluate our solution at any time rather than needing to march to that time. The Grünwald-Letnikov discretization presented in (1) is an example of a time-marching scheme. The computational time required for a long time solution via the Grünwald-Letnikov discretization is enormous, due to the fractionality being dependant on every time step that precedes the current time. Moreover, every time step incurs a truncation error, so that the further the solution marches the greater the error is; contrastingly, the present method’s error diminishes as time evolves. As a counter-point, if one were seeking a solution after a very short time, then a time-marching scheme may be better suited.

The method described and implemented above is a direct one and is therefore free of any iterative scheme. Hence the convergence of the scheme is difficult to speak of. Figure 6 illustrates how the approximate solution obtained converges to the exact solution with increasing number of collocation points for the present examples. However, due to the well-known phenomenon of the Chebyshev collocation method exhibiting large round-off errors for large number of collocation points, N x > 100 , due to finite-precision error accumulation [42, 43], the collocation hybrid scheme is not consistent with any given problem for N x or Δ x 0 .

This research has presented a numerical experimental comparison between the standard finite difference method and the Chebyshev collocation method as a means of spatial discretization when hybridized with the Laplace transform. These methods enjoy the benefits of an exact transform in temporal variable and furthermore allow one to easily and efficiently deal with a fractional order derivative, at the cost of numerically inverting the Laplace transform.

The goal of these methods is to apply a fractional order diffusion equation to an image on a bounded two-dimensional domain. The use of a discretization is therefore unavoidable given that the initial condition may in fact be discrete.

The solution to the discretized equations is found by writing a two-dimensional system of size N x × N x and N y × N y as a one-dimensional system of size N x N y × N x N y . While this is more computationally expensive, it does exhibit an elegance in construction. An alternative approach would be to implement an alternating-direction implicit (ADI) type scheme , where each dimension is acted on in turn rather than at once.

Due to the Laplace transform being a linear operator, this method is not suitable for nonlinear problems, nor is it applicable to FPDEs with both fractional spatial derivatives and fractional temporal derivatives.

We have shown a hybrid method combining the Laplace transform and a spatial discretization which can be extremely effective at solving linear FPDEs on a two-dimensional bounded domain with Dirichlet or Neumann boundary conditions.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank the referees for their comments that improved the quality of this paper.

Gao G.-H. Sun Z.-Z. Zhang Y.-N. A finite difference scheme for fractional sub-diffusion equations on an unbounded domain using artificial boundary conditions Journal of Computational Physics 2012 231 7 2865 2879 10.1016/j.jcp.2011.12.028 MR2882104 ZBL1242.65160 Podlubny I. Fractional Differential Equations 1999 198 Academic Press Mathematics in Science and Engineering MR1658022 ZBL1242.65160 Oldham K. B. Spanier J. The Fractional Calculus 1974 Academic Press MR0361633 Agrawal O. P. Solution for a fractional diffusion-wave equation defined in a bounded domain Nonlinear Dynamics 2002 29 1–4 145 155 10.1023/A:1016539022492 MR1926471 ZBL1009.65085 He J. Variational iteration method for delay differential equations Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation 1997 2 4 235 236 2-s2.0-0006990947 10.1016/S1007-5704(97)90008-3 Zhou J. K. Differential Transformation and Its Applications for Electrical CircuIts 1986 Wuhan, China Huazhong University Press Adomian G. A review of the decomposition method in applied mathematics Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 1988 135 2 501 544 10.1016/0022-247X(88)90170-9 MR967225 ZBL0671.34053 Yin F. Song J. Lu F. Leng H. A coupled method of Laplace transform and Legendre wavelets for Lane-Emden-type differential equations Journal of Applied Mathematics 2012 2012 16 163821 MR2997266 ZBL1264.65227 Khuri S. A. A Laplace decomposition algorithm applied to a class of nonlinear differential equations Journal of Applied Mathematics 2001 1 4 141 155 10.1155/S1110757X01000183 MR1884973 ZBL0996.65068 Wu G.-C. Baleanu D. Variational iteration method for fractional calculus—a universal approach by Laplace transform Advances in Difference Equations 2013 2013, article 18 10.1186/1687-1847-2013-18 MR3020186 Khan Y. An effective modification of the laplace decomposition method for nonlinear equations International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical Simulation 2009 10 11-12 1373 1376 2-s2.0-77950456001 Khan M. Gondal M. A. A new analytical solution of foam drainage equation by laplace decomposition method Journal of Advanced Research in Differential Equations 2010 2 3 53 Yin F. Song J. Cao X. Lu F. Couple of the variational iteration method and Legendre wavelets for nonlinear partial differential equations Journal of Applied Mathematics 2013 2013 11 157956 MR3032260 ZBL1266.65218 Song J. Yin F. Cao X. Lu F. Fractional variational iteration method versus Adomian's decomposition method in some fractional partial differential equations Journal of Applied Mathematics 2013 2013 10 392567 MR3032203 ZBL1266.35141 Atangana A. Kılıçman A. The use of sumudu transform for solving certain nonlinear fractional heat-like equations Abstract and Applied Analysis 2013 2013 12 737481 10.1155/2013/737481 Bhrawy A. H. Alofi A. S. Ezz-Eldien S. S. A quadrature tau method for fractional differential equations with variable coefficients Applied Mathematics Letters 2011 24 12 2146 2152 10.1016/j.aml.2011.06.016 MR2826154 ZBL1266.35141 Bhrawy A. H. Alghamdi M. A. A shifted jacobi-gauss-lobatto collocation method for solving nonlinear fractional langevin equation involving two fractional orders in different intervals Boundary Value Problems 2012 2012, article 62 Bhrawy A. H. Al-Shomrani M. M. A shifted legendre spectral method for fractional-order multi-point boundary value problems Advances in Difference Equations 2012 2012, article 19 10.1186/1687-2770-2012-62 Bhrawy A. H. Baleanu D. A spectral legendre-gauss-lobatto collocation method for a space-fractional advection diffusion equations with variable coefficients Reports on Mathematical Physics 2013 72 2 219 233 10.1016/S0034-4877(14)60015-X MR3164053 Bhrawy A. H. Alofi A. S. The operational matrix of fractional integration for shifted Chebyshev polynomials Applied Mathematics Letters 2013 26 1 25 31 10.1016/j.aml.2012.01.027 MR2971394 ZBL1255.65147 Akinlar M. A. Kurulay M. A novel method for analytical solutions of fractional partial differential equations Mathematical Problems in Engineering 2013 2013 4 195708 10.1155/2013/195708 Yin F. Song J. Wu Y. Zhang L. Numerical solution of the fractional partial differential equations by the two-dimensional fractional-order Legendre functions Abstract and Applied Analysis 2013 2013 13 562140 MR3129359 Yan L. Numerical solutions of fractional Fokker-Planck equations using iterative Laplace transform method Abstract and Applied Analysis 2013 2013 7 465160 MR3139430 Abdulaziz O. Hashim I. Saif A. Series solutions of time-fractional PDEs by homotopy analysis method Differential Equations and Nonlinear Mechanics 2008 2008 16 686512 MR2475784 ZBL1172.35305 Hemeda A. A. Solution of fractional partial differential equations in uid mechanics by extension of some iterative method Abstract and Applied Analysis 2013 2013 9 717540 10.1155/2013/717540 Pandir Y. Gurefe Y. Misirli E. The extended trial equation method for some time fractional differential equations Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society 2013 2013 13 491359 MR3071603 ZBL1172.35305 Bulut H. Baskonus H. M. Pandir Y. The modified trial equation method for fractional wave equation and time fractional generalized Burgers equation Abstract and Applied Analysis 2013 2013 8 636802 MR3096833 ZBL1172.35305 Baleanu D. Bhrawy A. Taha T. Two efficient generalized laguerre spectral algorithms for fractional initial value problems Abstract and Applied Analysis 2013 2013 10 546502 10.1155/2013/546502 Catté F. Lions P.-L. Morel J.-M. Coll T. Image selective smoothing and edge detection by nonlinear diffusion SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 1992 29 1 182 193 10.1137/0729012 MR1149092 ZBL1172.35305 Liu F.-C. Ha Y. Noise reduction based on reaction-diffusion system Proceedings of the International Conference on Wavelet Analysis and Pattern Recognition (ICWAPR '07) November 2007 831 834 2-s2.0-45149090669 10.1109/ICWAPR.2007.4420784 Cottet G.-H. Germain L. Image processing through reaction combined with nonlinear diffusion Mathematics of Computation 1993 61 204 659 673 10.2307/2153246 MR1195422 ZBL1172.35305 Kačur J. Mikula K. Solution of nonlinear diffusion appearing in image smoothing and edge detection Applied Numerical Mathematics 1995 17 1 47 59 10.1016/0168-9274(95)00008-I MR1335517 ZBL1172.35305 Alvarez L. Lions P.-L. Morel J.-M. Image selective smoothing and edge detection by nonlinear diffusion. II SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 1992 29 3 845 866 10.1137/0729052 MR1163360 ZBL1172.35305 Morfu S. On some applications of diffusion processes for image processing Physics Letters A: General, Atomic and Solid State Physics 2009 373 29 2438 2444 2-s2.0-67349167678 10.1016/j.physleta.2009.04.076 Yuste S. B. Acedo L. An explicit finite difference method and a new von Neumann-type stability analysis for fractional diffusion equations SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 2005 42 5 1862 1874 10.1137/030602666 MR2139227 ZBL1172.35305 Tadjeran C. Meerschaert M. M. A second-order accurate numerical method for the two-dimensional fractional diffusion equation Journal of Computational Physics 2007 220 2 813 823 10.1016/j.jcp.2006.05.030 MR2284325 ZBL1113.65124 Meerschaert M. M. Tadjeran C. Finite difference approximations for fractional advection-dispersion flow equations Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 2004 172 1 65 77 10.1016/j.cam.2004.01.033 MR2091131 ZBL1126.76346 Weideman J. A. C. Trefethen L. N. Parabolic and hyperbolic contours for computing the Bromwich integral Mathematics of Computation 2007 76 259 1341 1356 10.1090/S0025-5718-07-01945-X MR2299777 ZBL1113.65119 Jacobs B. A. Harley C. A comparison of two hybrid methods for applying the time-fractional heat equation to a two dimensional function AIP Conference Proceedings 2013 1558 2119 2122 Bayliss A. Class A. Matkowsky B. J. Roundoff error in computing derivatives using the chebyshev differentiation matrix Journal of Computational Physics 1995 116 2 380 383 2-s2.0-0001096265 10.1006/jcph.1995.1036 Thomas J. W. Numerical Partial Differential Equations 1999 Springer MR1685420 Breuer K. S. Everson R. M. On the errors incurred calculating derivatives using Chebyshev polynomials Journal of Computational Physics 1992 99 1 56 67 10.1016/0021-9991(92)90274-3 MR1153621 ZBL0747.65009 Don W. S. Solomonoff A. Accuracy and speed in computing the Chebyshev collocation derivative SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 1995 16 6 1253 1268 10.1137/0916073 MR1355492 ZBL0840.65010 Kazemi M. Erjaee G. H. Analytical and numerical solutions of different parabolic heat equations presented in the form of multi-term fractional differential equations Iranian Journal of Science and Technology. Transaction A. Science 2011 35 3 185 192 MR2958868 Momani S. Analytical approximate solution for fractional heat-like and wave-like equations with variable coefficients using the decomposition method Applied Mathematics and Computation 2005 165 2 459 472 10.1016/j.amc.2004.06.025 MR2137804 ZBL1070.65105 Birkhoff G. Varga R. S. Young D. Alternating direction implicit methods Advances in Computers 1962 3 Academic Press 189 273 MR0168131 ZBL0111.31402