1887
Volume 57, Issue 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Lax‐Wendroff and Nyström methods are numerical algorithms of temporal approximations for solving differential equations. These methods provide efficient algorithms for high‐accuracy seismic modeling. In the context of spatial pseudospectral discretizations, I explore these two kinds of methods in a comparative way. Their stability and dispersion relation are discussed in detail. Comparison between the fourth‐order Lax‐Wendroff method and a fourth‐order Nyström method shows that the Nyström method has smaller stability limit but has a better dispersion relation, which is closer to the sixth‐order Lax‐Wendroff method. The structure‐preserving property of these methods is also revealed. The Lax‐Wendroff methods are a second‐order symplectic algorithm, which is independent of the order of the methods. This result is useful for understanding the error growth of Lax‐Wendroff methods. Numerical experiments based on the scalar wave equation are performed to test the presented schemes and demonstrate the advantages of the symplectic methods over the nonsymplectic ones.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2009.00802.x
2009-04-20
2020-09-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AlfordR.M., KellyK.R. and BooreD.M.1974. Accuracy of finite‐difference modeling of the acoustic wave equation. Geophysics39, 834–842.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BlanesS. and MoanP.C.2002. Practical symplectic partitioned Runge‐Kutta and Runge‐Kutta‐Nyström methods. Journal of Computational Applied Mathematics142, 313–330.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. CalvoM.P. and Sanz‐SernaJ.M.1993. High‐order symplectic Runge‐Kutta‐Nyström methods. SIAM Journal of Scientific Computing14, 1237–1252.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. CarcioneJ.M., HermanG.C. and Ten KroodeA.P.E.2002. Seismic modeling. Geophysics67, 1304–1325.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. ChenJ.B.2006. Modeling the scalar wave equation with Nyström methods. Geophysics71, T151–T158.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. ChenJ.B.2007. High‐order time discretizations in seismic modeling. Geophysics72, SM151–SM122.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. DablainM.A.1986. The application of high‐order differencing to the scalar wave equation. Geophysics51, 54–66.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. DormyE. and TarantolaA.1995. Numerical simulation of elastic wave propagation using a finite volume method. Journal of Geophysical Research100, 2123–2133.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. FornbergB.1987. The pseudospectral method: Comparisons with finite differences for the elastic wave equation. Geophysics52, 483–501.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. FornbergB.1996. A Practical Guide to Pseudospectral Method . Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. GazdagJ.1981. Modeling of the acoustic wave equation with transform methods. Geophysics46, 854–859.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. HairerE., LubichC. and WarnnerG.2002. Geometric Numerical Integration: Structure‐preserving Algorithms for Ordinary Differential Equations . Springer‐Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. HairerE., NøsettS.P. and WarnnerG.1993. Solving Ordinary Differential Equations I . Springer‐Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. KellyK.R., WardR.W., TreitelS. and AlfordR.M.1976. Synthetic seismograms: A finite‐difference approach. Geophysics41, 2–27.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. KomatitschD. and VilotteJ.P.1998. The spectral element method: An efficient tool to simulate the seismic response of 2D and 3D geological structures. Bull. Seism. Soc. Am.88, 369–392.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. KosloffD. and BaysalE.1982. Forward modeling by the Fourier method. Geophysics47, 1402–1412.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. KosloffD., ReshefM. and LoewentalD.1984. Elastic wave calculations by the Fourier method. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America74, 875–891.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. LunkC. and SimenB.2005. Runge‐Kutta‐Nyström methods with maximized stability domain in structural dynamics. Applied Numerical Mathematics53, 373–389.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. MarfurtK.J.1984. Accuracy of finite‐difference and finite‐element modeling of the scalar and elastic wave equations. Geophysics49, 533–549.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. NyströmE.J.1925. Über die numerische Integration von Differentialgleichungen. Act. Soc. Sci. Fenn.50, 1–54.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. OkunborP.J. and SkeelR.D.1992. Canonical Runge‐Kutta‐Nyström methods of orders 5 and 6: Working Document 92‐1, Dep. Computer Science, University of Illinois .
  22. QinM.Z. and ZhuW.J.1991. Canonical Runge‐Kutta‐Nyström methods for second order ODE's. Computational Mathematics Applications22, 85–95.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Sanz‐SernaJ.M. and CalvoM.1994. Numerical Hamiltonian Problems . Chapman and Hall, London .
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Tal‐EzerH., KosloffD. and KorenZ.1987. An accurate scheme for seismic forward modeling. Geophysical Prospecting35, 479–490.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. TsitourasCh.1999. A tenth‐order symplectic Runge‐Kutta‐Nyström method. Celestial Mechanics of Dynamic Astronomy74, 223–230.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. VirieuxJ.E.1986. P‐SV wave propagation in heterogeneous media: Velocity‐stress finite‐difference method. Geophysics51, 888–901.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2009.00802.x
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2009.00802.x
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error