A robust, exponentially fitted higher-order numerical method for a two-parameter singularly perturbed boundary value problem

Abstract

This study constructs a robust higher-order fitted operator finite difference method for a two-parameter singularly perturbed boundary value problem. The derivatives in the governing ordinary differential equation are substituted by second-order central finite difference approximations, after which the fitting parameter is introduced and determined. The resulting system of linear equations may then be solved using the Thomas method. The stability, consistency, and convergence of the current method have been thoroughly validated. To enhance accuracy and achieve a higher-order numerical solution, a post-processing technique was employed to upgrade the method from second-order to fourth-order convergence. Finally, three test examples were used to confirm the method's appropriateness. The numerical results demonstrate that the proposed technique is stable, consistent, and produces a higher-order numerical solution than the existing ones in the literature.

1 Introduction

Singularly perturbed differential equations involve the highest-order derivative term being multiplied by a small perturbation parameter, ε. In the context of singularly perturbed problems, differential equations with two small parameters affecting the diffusion and convection terms are intriguing areas of research. The main purpose of this study is to obtain a robust higher-order numerical method to solve a two-parameter singularly perturbed boundary value problem. Find Υ such that

subject to the boundary conditions

where ε(0 < ε ≪ 1) and μ(0 < μ ≪ 1) are the small parameters that make the differential equation singularly perturbed. Let us assume the functions a(θ), b(θ) and f(θ) are sufficiently smooth and bounded to ensure the existence of a unique solution. Assume that there exist constants α, β and ζ independent of ε and μ such that for any θ = [0, 1] the conditions,

hold for some constant α, β and ζ. Assume . When μ = 1, Equation 1 is reduced to the singularly perturbed convection-diffusion boundary value problem. When μ = 0, Equation 1 reduces to a well-known singularly perturbed reaction-diffusion boundary value problem. The mathematical model for the kind of Equation 1 often arises in chemical reactor theory [1], transport phenomena in chemistry and biology [2], and lubrication theory [3]. The nature of the two-parameter problem was asymptotically examined by O'Malley [4], where the ratio of μ to ε has significant role in the solution. For this problem, two boundary layers occur at θ = 0 and θ = 1. Because of the presence of these layers, some standard numerical methods in Lodhi et al. [5], Kambampati et al. [6], Pandit and Kumar [7], Khandelwal and Khan [8] are applied to a uniform mesh, which provides an oscillatory numerical solution. Consequently, considerable attention has been devoted to using non-uniform meshes to solve two-parameter singularly perturbed boundary value problems, as discussed in works by O'Riordan and Pickett [9], Roos and Uzelac [10], Kadalbajoo and Yadaw [11], Kadalbajoo and Jha [12], Brdar and Zarin [13], Luo et al. [14], Brdar and Zarin [15, 16], Padmaja et al. [17], Andisso and Duressa [18], Linß and Roos [19], Cheng [20], Zhang and Lv [21], Valarmathi and Ramanujam [22], Patidar [23] to solve two-parameter singularly perturbed boundary value problems. The majority of the previously developed methods to solve the problem at hand are less accurate and of lower order. Inspired by this, the goal of this study is to offer a high order and more accurate fitted operator method with the help of post-processing technique to solve the considered problem. Because of the presence of boundary layer in the solution of Equation 1, devising a higher-order convergent numerical method is a big challenge. In this study, we apply the well-known post-processing technique of Richardson extrapolation method to obtain fourth order uniformly convergent numerical solution of Equation 1. The present approach yields a more accurate solution in terms of maximum absolute errors than previous approaches found in the literature.

Some robust numerical methods for one-parameter and two-parameter singularly perturbed problems in studies by Hassen and Duressa [24], Mohye et al. [25], Tesfaye et al. [26], Cheru et al. [27], Daba et al. [28], Gupta et al. [29], singularly perturbed turning point problem in Gupta et al. [30], time-fractional singularly perturbed convection-diffusion problem [31], singularly perturbed problems with spatio-time delays the study by Ejere et al. [32] and singularly perturbed problems Burger-Huxley problem in the study by Daba and Duressa [33] and Derzie et al. [34]. Some methods are employed studies by Li et al. [35], El Ahmadi et al. [36], Nachaoui [37], Mardanov et al. [38] to solve different types of differential equations.

The remaining part of the article is arranged as follows: In Section 2, we have provided a brief description of the present method for the numerical solution of Equations 1, 2. The convergence analysis of the method is presented in Section 3. Section 4 presents the numerical results, and comparisons are made with other existing methods. Finally, the conclusion is provided at the end of the article in Section 5.

2 The continuous problem

In this section, we provide a priori bounds for the solution and its corresponding derivatives. The governing problem in Equations 1, 2 exhibits twin boundary layers with different layer widths depending on the relation between the values of ε and μ. If αμ² ≤ δε, then the reduced problem corresponding to Equations 1, 2 is given by

Thus, the boundary layers are expected near θ = 0 and θ = 1, with a width of if Υ₀(0) ≠ γ₀ and Υ₀(1) ≠ γ₁. If αμ² ≥ δε, then the reduced problem corresponding to Equations 1, 2 is given by

Thus, the boundary layer of width O(ε/μ) is expected in the right neighborhood of θ = 0 if Υ_μ(0) ≠ γ₀ and the boundary layer of width O(μ) is expected in the left neighborhood of θ = 1 if Υ_μ(1) ≠ γ₁. The assumptions given for Equations 1, 2 ensure that the differential operator Π_{ε, μ} satisfies the following maximum principle.

Lemma 1. Let ϖ(θ) be a smooth function such that ϖ(0) ≥ 0 and ϖ(1) ≥ 0. If Π_ε,μ ϖ(θ) ≥ 0, for θ ∈ Ω, then ϖ(θ) ≥ 0, for .

Proof. Assume θ^* be such that and ϖ(θ^*) < 0. Then, it is obvious that θ^* ∉ {0, 1}. Hence, ϖ′(θ^*) = 0 and ϖ^′′(θ^*) ≥ 0. Now, , which is contradiction. Hence, we conclude that ϖ(θ) ≥ 0 for all θ ∈ [0, 1].     □

The following lemma proves the stability estimate to obtain a unique solution.

Lemma 2. On , the solution Υ(θ) to the problem in Equations 1, 2 satisfy the bound

Proof. Defining two functions ζ^±(θ) such that

It is straightforward that ζ^±(0) ≥ 0 and ζ^±(1) ≥ 0. Now, for θ ∈ Ω,

Therefore, the desired result follows by applying Lemma (1).     □

The solution to the reduced problem μa(θ)Υ′(θ)+b(θ)Υ(θ) = f(θ), in general, does not satisfy both the boundary conditions; therefore, there exist boundary layers at both the boundaries, θ = 0 and θ = 1 [10]. To describe these boundary layers, the characteristic equation for the homogeneous part of Equation 1 with constant coefficients that are the minimum values of the corresponding variable coefficients is considered as

The characteristic equation in Equation 3 has two real solutions

The solution Ψ₀(θ) < 0 describes the boundary layer at θ = 0, whereas Ψ₁(θ) > 0 describes the boundary layer at θ = 1. To bound the solution and its derivatives, we define

The two real solutions Ψ₀(θ) < 0 and Ψ₁(θ) < 0 describing the boundary layers, respectively, at θ = 0 and θ = 1 are based on the two cases below.

Case 1. If as ε → 0, then

The governing Equation 1 has two boundary layers that behave like the reaction-diffusion case (μ≈0) with each of width at θ = 1 and θ = 0. The complementary function of Equation 1 may be expressed as

where A₁ and B₁ are real constant numbers.

Case 2. If as μ → 0, then

In this case, the governing Equation 1 has two boundary layers near θ = 0 and θ = 1 with different layer widths O(ε/μ) and O(μ), respectively. Now, the complementary function of Equation 1 can be given as

where A₂ and B₂ are real constant numbers. Note that most numerical methods give an accurate numerical solution for case 1, since μ≈0 behaves like a reaction-diffusion problem. For case 2, it is challenging to produce an accurate numerical solution. Therefore, in this study, we focus on case 2.

Theorem 1. For any 0 < p < 1, we have up to a certain order q that depends on the smoothness of the data. If , then the solution u(θ) satisfies

Proof. The details of the proof is well established in studies by Roos and Uzelac [10].     □

3 The discrete problem

Let N be a positive integer and [0,1] be the closed domain, where N is the subinterval such that 0 = θ₀ < θ₁ < ⋯ < θ_N = 1 and i = 0, 1, ⋯ , N. Using the notation Υ_i as a numerical approximation to the analytical solution Υ(θ_i) and second-order central finite difference approximations for the second- and first derivatives, we have the discrete problem as

with the discrete boundary conditions

where . In order to regulate the solution behavior of the singular perturbation parameter ε, we have introduced the fitting factor η on the homogeneous part of Equation 4.

The discrete problem in Equation 6 can be written as the three-term recurrence relation of the form

with the discrete boundary conditions in Equation 5 and where the coefficients are given by

The developed method is considered as an exponentially fitted operator finite difference method to solve the problem in Equations 1, 2. The coefficients L_i, M_i, and R_i are given to satisfy the conditions |L_i| > 0, |M_i| > 0, |R_i| > 0 and |M_i| ≥ |L_i|+|R_i|. These conditions guarantee that the linear system is diagonally dominant and can be solved by a tri-diagonal solver, which is the Thomas algorithm.

3.1 Determination of fitting factor

It is possible to rewrite the equation in the following form to determine the fitting factor.

Multiplying Equation 9 by ℓ and taking the limit on both sides as h → 0 yields

where . To determine the fitting factor in Equation 10, the theory of singular perturbations have been applied. Based on O'Malley's [39] theory of singular perturbations, the asymptotic solution of Equation 10 for the left boundary layer is as follows

where Υ₀(θ) represents the solution of the reduced problem

Taking the Taylor series expansion for a(θ) restricted to the first term about the point θ = 0 and also evaluating the limit as ℓ → 0 for θ_i = iℓ, we get

where Similarly,

Substituting Equations 12 and 13 into Equation 10 and simplifying gives the following fitting factor:

For the right boundary layer, consider the asymptotic solution of the form

Using Taylor's series expansion for a(θ) restricting to the first term about θ = 1 and also taking the limit as ℓ → 0, we obtain

Similarly, we have

Substituting Equations 16 and 17 into Equation 10 and simplifying gives the following fitting factor:

Combining Equations 14 and 18 gives variable fitting factor as follows

4 Convergence analysis

In this section, we prove the stability and convergence analysis of the discrete problem. First, we want to prove the discrete comparison principle for the discrete scheme in Equation 12.

Theorem 2. Assume be discrete operator and Θ_i be comparison function such that . If Υ₀ ≤ Θ₀ and Υ_N ≤ Θ_N, then Υ_i ≤ Θ_i ∀i = 0, ⋯ , N.

Proof. The matrix associated with operator is of size (N − 1) × (N − 1) and satisfies the property of M-matrix. That is, the inverse matrix exists, and it is nonnegative. See the detailed proof in Kellogg and Tsan [40]. This guarantees the existence and uniqueness of the discrete solution.     □

Lemma 3. Let Υ_i be the discrete solution. Then, we have the following bound

Proof. Let and define the two barrier functions by At the boundary points, we have , and On the discretized domain 1 ≤ i ≤ N − 1, we have

where b_i ≥ β > 0 and from Theorem (2), we get , for      □

We use the truncation error given in Equation 5 to show the convergence analysis of the present method as follows:

Theorem 3. Let Υ(θ_i) be the continuous solution and Υ_i be the discrete solution. Then, the error bound satisfies

where C is a constant independent of ε, μ and the mesh lengths h.

The above theorem shows that the present method is second-order convergent, independent of the parameters ε and μ. Next, we develop the post-processing technique to improve the accuracy of the present method and order of convergence.

4.1 Post-processing technique

To improve the accuracy of the numerical solution Υ^N by the post-processing technique, we solve the discrete scheme in Equation 7 on the fine mesh with 2N mesh intervals. From Equation 20, we have

where Υ(θ_i) and Υ_i are continuous and numerical solutions, respectively, and C is a constant independent of the perturbation parameters ε, μ and mesh size ℓ and . Assume Ω^N ⊂ Ω^2N, where Ω^N is the mesh obtained from the mesh interval ℓ, and Ω^2N is the mesh obtained by bisecting the mesh interval ℓ. Denoting the numerical solution obtained with the mesh points Ω^2N by . Consider the mesh and Equation 21 works for any ℓ ≠ 0 which implies

where R^N is the remainder term of the truncation error with O(ℓ²). Now, we construct another mesh which is obtained by bisecting the mesh Ω^N. Let us define the step size as . Then, for . For the mesh , we have

where R^2N is the remainder term of the truncation error with O(ℓ⁴). Multiplying Equation 23 by four and subtracting the result obtained from Equation 22 yields

Dropping the error term in Equation 24 and rearranging, we have

from which the following extrapolation formula is developed

which is also the numerical solution for Υ(θ_i). The error bound for after post-processing technique can now be stated in the theorem below.

Theorem 4. Let Υ(θ_i) be the solution to the continuous problem and be the post-processed solution. Then, the new error bound takes the form

where C is a constant independent of ε, μ and the mesh length h.

As a result, the post-processing technique enhances the second-order parameter-uniformly convergent method to achieve fourth-order parameter-uniform convergence. Consequently, the current approach is fourth-order convergent and more efficient. We now implement the theoretical findings from the preceding sections through computerized calculations.

5 Numerical computations and discussions

In this section, we undertake computerized calculations to validate the efficacy of the proposed method against the theoretical results described in previous sections.

Example 1. Consider variable coefficient two parameter singularly perturbed problem

Example 2. Consider variable coefficient two parameter singularly perturbed problem

Since the exact solutions for each example are not available, the double mesh principle was employed to compute the maximum absolute errors for each (ε, μ):

where is the numerical solution with N mesh points and is the numerical solution at the finer mesh with 2N mesh points.

Example 3. Consider constant coefficient two parameter singularly perturbed problem

for which the analytical solution is given by

where

The maximum absolute errors for each (ε, μ) may be determined using the following formula, as the exact solution for Example (3) is known.

where is the numerical solution with N mesh points and is the analytical solution. The (ε, μ)-maximum errors for all the Examples are calculated using the following formula

Furthermore, we compute the numerical rate of convergence before and after post-processing technique with the following formulas, respectively:

The (ε, μ)−maximum rates of convergence before and after post-processing techniques were calculated using the following formulas, respectively

Tables 1–3 show the calculated maximum errors and the parameter-uniform errors e^N for Examples (1)–(3), respectively. These findings demonstrate that the current approach provides parameter-uniform convergence for both the before and after post-processing technique. Figures 1–3 display the plots of the numerical simulations for Examples (1)–(3). Figures 1–3 illustrate the plots of the numerical solution profile for Examples (1)–(3) for fixed μ and varying ε. From these figures, we observe that for fixed μ as ε → 0, strong layers are formed. Figures 4–6, respectively, show the log–log scale plots of the maximum errors for Examples (1), (2), and (3). The numerical findings show that the current higher-order fitted operator finite difference technique provides a numerical solution with more accuracy. The application of post-processing approach improves the accuracy of the numerical solution and speeds up the rate of convergence, as demonstrated by the numerical findings in all of the Tables.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

6 Conclusion

A higher-order exponentially fitted operator finite difference method for two parameter singularly perturbed boundary value problems is presented in this study. The stability and uniform convergence of the current method are well established, ensuring second-order convergence. The post-processing technique is then applied to enhance the convergence order of the method and improve accuracy in terms of maximum errors. Theoretically, we have proven that the post-processing technique provides fourth-order parameter-uniform convergence. Three numerical examples are computed for various perturbation parameter values in order to verify the applicability of the current method. The present method can be applied to singularly perturbed parabolic problem with or without delay.

References

• 1.

  ChenJO'Malley RJr. On the asymptotic solution of a two-parameter boundary value problem of chemical reactor theory. SIAM J Appl Math. (1974) 26:717–29. 10.1137/0126064

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2.

  BiggeJBohlE. Deformations of the bifurcation diagram due to discretization. Mathem. Comput. (1985) 45:393–403. 10.1090/S0025-5718-1985-0804931-X

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3.

  DiPrimaRC. Asymptotic methods for an infinitely long slider squeeze-film bearing. J Lubr Technol. (1968) 90:173–83. 10.1115/1.3601534

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4.

  O'MalleyR. Two-parameter singular perturbation problems for second-order equations. J. Math. Mech. (1967) 16:1143–64.

  • Google Scholar

• 5.

  LodhiRKJaiswalBRNandanDRameshK. Numerical Solution of two-parameter singularly perturbed convection-diffusion boundary value problems via fourth order compact finite difference method. Math Modell Eng Probl. (2021) 8:819–25. 10.18280/mmep.080519

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6.

  KambampatiSEmineniSPReddyMKollojuP. Fourth order computational spline method for two-parameter singularly perturbed boundary value problem. Int J Appl Mech Eng. (2023) 28:79–93. 10.59441/ijame/176516

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7.

  PanditSKumarM. Haar wavelet approach for numerical solution of two parameters singularly perturbed boundary value problems. Appl Math Inf Sci. (2014) 8:2965. 10.12785/amis/080634

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8.

  KhandelwalPKhanA. Singularly perturbed convection-diffusion boundary value problems with two small parameters using nonpolynomial spline technique. Math Sci. (2017) 11:119–26. 10.1007/s40096-017-0215-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9.

  O'RiordanEPickettM. Numerical approximations to the scaled first derivatives of the solution to a two parameter singularly perturbed problem. J Comput Appl Math. (2019) 347:128–49. 10.1016/j.cam.2018.08.004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10.

  RoosHGUzelacZ. The SDFEM for a convection-diffusion problem with two small parameters. Comput Methods Appl Math. (2003) 3:443–58. 10.2478/cmam-2003-0029

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11.

  KadalbajooMKYadawAS. B-Spline collocation method for a two-parameter singularly perturbed convection-diffusion boundary value problems. Appl Math Comput. (2008) 201:504–13. 10.1016/j.amc.2007.12.038

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12.

  KadalbajooMKJhaA. Exponentially fitted cubic spline for two-parameter singularly perturbed boundary value problems. Int J Comput Math. (2012) 89:836–50. 10.1080/00207160.2012.663492

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 13.

  BrdarMZarinH. Convection-diffusion-reaction problems on a B-type mesh. PAMM. (2013) 13:423–4. 10.1002/pamm.201310207

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14.

  LuoXQLiuLBOuyangALongG. B-spline collocation and self-adapting differential evolution (jDE) algorithm for a singularly perturbed convection-diffusion problem. Soft Computing. (2018) 22:2683–93. 10.1007/s00500-017-2523-9

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15.

  BrdarMZarinH. On graded meshes for a two-parameter singularly perturbed problem. Appl Math Comput. (2016) 282:97–107. 10.1016/j.amc.2016.01.060

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16.

  BrdarMZarinH. A singularly perturbed problem with two parameters on a Bakhvalov-type mesh. J Comput Appl Math. (2016) 292:307–19. 10.1016/j.cam.2015.07.011

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17.

  PadmajaPAparnaPGorlaRSRPothannaN. Numerical solution of singularly perturbed two parameter problems using exponential splines. Int J Appl Mech Eng. (2021) 26:160–72. 10.2478/ijame-2021-0025

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18.

  AndissoFSDuressaGF. Graded mesh B-spline collocation method for two parameters singularly perturbed boundary value problems. MethodsX. (2023) 11:102336. 10.1016/j.mex.2023.102336

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19.

  LinßTRoosHG. Analysis of a finite-difference scheme for a singularly perturbed problem with two small parameters. J Math Anal Appl. (2004) 289:355–66. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2003.08.017

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20.

  ChengY. On the local discontinuous Galerkin method for singularly perturbed problem with two parameters. J Comput Appl Math. (2021) 392:113485. 10.1016/j.cam.2021.113485

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21.

  ZhangJLvY. High-order finite element method on a Bakhvalov-type mesh for a singularly perturbed convection-diffusion problem with two parameters. Appl Math Comput. (2021) 397:125953. 10.1016/j.amc.2021.125953

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 22.

  ValarmathiSRamanujamN. Computational methods for solving two-parameter singularly perturbed boundary value problems for second-order ordinary differential equations. Appl Math Comput. (2003) 136:415–41. 10.1016/S0096-3003(02)00053-X

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23.

  PatidarKC. A robust fitted operator finite difference method for a two-parameter singular perturbation problem1. J Diff Equ Appl. (2008) 14:1197–214. 10.1080/10236190701817383

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24.

  HassenZIDuressaGF. Parameter-uniformly convergent numerical scheme for singularly perturbed delay parabolic differential equation via extended B-spline collocation. Front Appl Math Stat. (2023) 9:1255672. 10.3389/fams.2023.1255672

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25.

  MohyeMAMunyakaziJBDinkaTG. A nonstandard fitted operator finite difference method for two-parameter singularly perturbed time-delay parabolic problems. Front Appl Math Stat. (2023) 9:1222162. 10.3389/fams.2023.1222162

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26.

  TesfayeSKDuressaGFWoldaregayMMDinkaTG. Fitted computational method for singularly perturbed convection-diffusion equation with time delay. Front Appl Math Stat. (2023) 9:1244490. 10.3389/fams.2023.1244490

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27.

  CheruSLDuressaGFMekonnenTB. Numerical integration method for two-parameter singularly perturbed time delay parabolic problem. Front Appl Math Stat. (2024) 10:1414899. 10.3389/fams.2024.1414899

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 28.

  DabaITMelesseWGKebedeGD. Third-degree B-spline collocation method for singularly perturbed time delay parabolic problem with two parameters. Front Appl Math Stat. (2024) 9:1260651. 10.3389/fams.2023.1260651

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29.

  GuptaVKadalbajooMKDubeyRK. A parameter-uniform higher order finite difference scheme for singularly perturbed time-dependent parabolic problem with two small parameters. Int J Comput Math. (2019) 96:474–99. 10.1080/00207160.2018.1432856

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30.

  GuptaVSahooSKDubeyRK. Robust higher order finite difference scheme for singularly perturbed turning point problem with two outflow boundary layers. Comput Appl Math. (2021) 40:1–23. 10.1007/s40314-021-01564-w

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31.

  SahooSKGuptaV. A robust uniformly convergent finite difference scheme for the time-fractional singularly perturbed convection-diffusion problem. Comput Math Appli. (2023) 137:126–46. 10.1016/j.camwa.2023.02.016

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32.

  EjereAHDuressaGFWoldaregayMMDinkaTG. A robust numerical scheme for singularly perturbed differential equations with spatio-temporal delays. Front Appl Math Stat. (2023) 9:1125347. 10.3389/fams.2023.1125347

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33.

  DabaITDuressaGF. Numerical treatment of singularly perturbed unsteady Burger-Huxley equation. Front Appl Math Stat. (2023) 8:1061245. 10.3389/fams.2022.1061245

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34.

  DerzieEBMunyakaziJBDinkaTG. A NSFD method for the singularly perturbed Burgers-Huxley equation. Front Appl Math Stat. (2023) 9:1068890. 10.3389/fams.2023.1068890

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 35.

  LiJSinghGIlhanOAManafianJGasimovYS. Modulational instability, multiple Exp-function method, SIVP, solitary and cross-kink solutions for the generalized KP equation. AIMS Math. (2021) 6:7555–84. 10.3934/math.2021441

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 36.

  El AhmadiMAyoujilABerrajaaM. Existence and multiplicity of solutions for a class of double phase variable exponent problems with nonlinear boundary condition. Adv Math Models Appl. (2023) 8:401–14.

  • Google Scholar

• 37.

  NachaouiA. An iterative method for cauchy problems subject to the convection-diffusion equation. Adv Math Models Appl. (2023) 8:327–38.

  • Google Scholar

• 38.

  MardanovMJSharifovYAGasimovYSCattaniC. Non-linear first-order differential boundary problems with multipoint and integral conditions. Fractal Fract. (2021) 5:15. 10.3390/fractalfract5010015

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39.

  O'MalleyRE. Introduction to Singular Perturbations. New York, NY (1974).

  • Google Scholar

• 40.

  KelloggRBTsanA. Analysis of some difference approximations for a singular perturbation problem without turning points. Math Comput. (1978) 32:1025–39. 10.1090/S0025-5718-1978-0483484-9

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar