Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 131 (2021) 269–279

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enganabound

Approximation of the first eigenpair of the p(x)-Laplacian using WEB-spline

based mesh-free method
Suchismita Patra a, *, a, Naraveni Rajashekar a, b, V.V.K. Srinivas Kumar a
a
Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, India
b
Department of Mathematics, CVR College of Engineering, Mangalpally, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana, India 501510

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

MSC[MOS]: Our objective in this article is to develop weighted extended B-spline (WEB-spline) approximation of the first
41A15 eigenpair of p(x)-Laplacian problem. One of the reason for choosing WEB-spline based mesh-free method for
49R05 solving p(x)-Laplacian problem is that, it has additional advantages compared to usual finite element method.
65N22
For example, it does not require any mesh generation procedure and hence eliminates the difficult, time
65N25
65N30
consuming preprocessing step in finite element method. Also, it combines the computational advantages of B-
splines and geometric flexibility of standard mesh-based elements. To compute the first eigenpair of p(x)-Lap­
Keywords:
Mesh-free method
lacian problem, we examine the problem numerically by applying an inverse power method with three different
WEB-splines minimization techniques and we compare the results obtained. Finally, we study the asymptotic behaviour of the
p(x)-Laplacian eigenvalue problem of p(x)-Laplacian and validate the results comparing with those given in the literature.
Eigenvalue problem
Inverse power method

1. Introduction (1) reduces (up to the power p) to the following minimization problem
∫
In recent years, increasing attention has been paid to the study of λ1 = inf |∇u|p dx
(2)
1,p
partial differential equations and variational problems involving vari­
u∈W0 (Ω) Ω
∫
able exponent growth conditions. This interest in studying such prob­ u∕
=0 |u|p dx
lems is due to a wide range of applications in nonlinear elasticity theory,
Ω

electrorheological fluid dynamics or image restoration with high accu­ and its associated Euler-Lagrange equation
racy (cf. [16] and the references therein). Therefore, the eigenvalue
problems involving variable exponent growth conditions are considered − ∇⋅(|∇u|p− 2 ∇u) = λ|u|p− 2 u (3)
to be more significant. In this paper, we study the numerical approxi­
mation of the first eigenpair of p(x)-Laplacian problem which comes which is famous eigenvalue problem of p-Laplacian. Over the last de­
from the minimization of the Rayleigh quotient cades, the eigenvalue problem involving p-Laplacian has been exten­
sively studied and now it has huge literature on the theoretical study as
λ1 = inf
‖ ∇u ‖p(x) well as numerical computation of the first eigenpair of the p-Laplacian.
(1)
1,p(x)
u∈W0 (Ω)
‖ u ‖p(x)
, On the contrary, for the variable exponent case the study of eigenvalue
problem is more complicated than the constant case as the trivial
u∕
=0

generalization of (2) does not possess homogeneity property (that is; if u

where Ω is a bounded domain in Rm , variable exponent p(x) is a
measurable function with 1 < p1 ≤ p(x) ≤ p2 < ∞ such that 1 /p(x) is
globally log-Hölder continuous [13] and the norm ‖ ⋅ ‖p(x) is so called
Luxemburg norm (for details, see Section 2).
It is well known that for p(x) = p; that is, the constant case, problem
is a minimizer, so is ku for any non-zero real constant k). However, the
homogeneity property can be restored by considering the Rayleigh
quotient given in the form (1). Then the corresponding Euler-Lagrange
equation is

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: suchismitapatra22@gmail.com (S. Patra), snaraveni@gmail.com (N. Rajashekar), vvksrini@maths.iitd.ac.in (V.V.K. Srinivas Kumar).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enganabound.2021.06.020
Received 3 February 2021; Received in revised form 24 June 2021; Accepted 26 June 2021
Available online 19 July 2021
0955-7997/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Patra et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 131 (2021) 269–279

(⃒ ⃒
⃒ ∇u ⃒p(x)− 2 ∇u
) ⃒ ⃒
⃒ u ⃒p(x)− 2 u problem using WEB-spline method along with steepest descent and
− ∇⋅ ⃒⃒ ⃒
⃒ = λS⃒⃒ ⃒ , (4) quasi-Newton minimization technique. Further, in [28] the authors
‖ ∇u ‖p(x) ‖ ∇u ‖p(x) ‖ u ‖p(x) ⃒ ‖ u ‖p(x)
discussed the WEB-spline approximation of the first eigenpair of a
where p-Laplacian problem, where p is a constant exponent, a special case of
(∫ ⃒ ⃒ )− 1 ∫ ⃒ ⃒ p(x)-Laplacian problem. A linearization method has used to solve the
⃒ u ⃒p(x)
⃒ ⃒
⃒ ∇u ⃒p(x)
⃒ ⃒ discretized eigenvalue problem in [28]. Motivated by the above works,
S= ⃒‖ u ‖ ⃒ dx ⃒‖ ∇u ‖ ⃒ dx.
Ω p(x) Ω p(x) in this paper we discuss the WEB-spline approximation of the first
eigenpair of p(x)-Laplacian problem by applying an inverse power
In problem (4), a real parameter λ is said to be an eigenvalue if there method given in [9]. Moreover, to solve the inner minimization prob­
1,p(x)
exists a non-zero u ∈ W0 (Ω) such that lems associated with inverse power method we use three distinct stra­
∫ ⃒⃒ ⃒p(x)− 2 ∫ ⃒⃒ ⃒p(x)− 2 tegies for choosing the descent direction namely, steepest descent,
⃒ ∇u ⃒
⃒ ∇u
.∇v dx = λS ⃒ u ⃒
⃒ u
v dx, conjugate gradient, and quasi-Newton direction. To the best of our
⃒ ⃒ ⃒ ⃒
Ω ‖ ∇u ‖p(x) ‖ ∇u ‖p(x) Ω ‖ u ‖p(x) ‖ u ‖p(x) knowledge, this is the first attempt to compute the first eigenpair of
(5) p(x)-Laplacian problem using a mesh-free method.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we study
1,p(x)
for all v ∈ W0 (Ω). In this case, the function u is called an eigen­ the asymptotic case of the eigenvalue problem with variable infinity.
function associated with λ, then we call the pair (λ, u) as the eigenpair. Then in Section 3, we review the construction of WEB-splines and
Now one can observe that for the constant case, (λ, u) is an eigenpair for discuss their primary features. In Section 4, we propose the WEB-spline
√̅̅̅
(4) if and only if (λp , u/ p p) is an eigenpair for (3) with ‖ u ‖p = approximation of the first eigenpair of the p(x)-Laplacian and discuss the
√ ̅̅̅
‖ u/ p‖Lp (Ω) = 1.
p methodology for solving it numerically. In Section 5, we carry out nu­
There are quite a number of articles available in the literature for merical experiments to illustrate the theory and the proposed methods.
numerical computation of the first eigenpair of the p-Laplacian (cf. [6–8, Finally, in Section 6 we present our concluding remarks.
24,27]). However, only a few of them are concerning numerical
computation of the first eigenpair of the p(x)-Laplacian. So far in the 2. Asymptotic case of the eigenvalue problem
literature (cf. [3,9]), in order to compute the first eigenpair of
p(x)-Laplacian the following model problem has been solved using in­ We begin this section by defining some generalized Lebesgue-
verse power method Sobolev spaces which we use in this paper. The variable exponent
Lebesgue space Lp(x) (Ω) is
λ21 = Λ = inf ‖ ∇u ‖2p(x) ∫
1,p(x)
u∈W0 (Ω)
.
‖ u ‖2p(x) Lp(x) (Ω) = {f : f is a measurable real valued function, |f (x)|p(x) dx < ∞}
u∕
=0
Ω

In [3], only the case p(x) ≥ 2 with smooth exponent p(x) is considered. endowed with the Luxemburg norm ‖ ⋅ ‖p(x) , which is defined as follows
Further, the authors in [9] worked with the more general exponent p(x) { ∫ ⃒ ⃒ }
⃒f (x)⃒p(x) dx
in the range (1,∞), here the exponent p(x) is a measurable function such ‖ f ‖p(x) = inf ρ : ⃒ ⃒
⃒ ρ ⃒ p(x) ≤ 1 (6)
that 1/p(x) globally log-Hölder continuous. In both the articles, authors
ρ>0 Ω

used mesh-based finite element method for discretization of the prob­

lem. However, there are certain disadvantages using mesh-based finite
element method in dealing with the problem having complex domain.
For instance, mesh generation in the case of domains with boundaries
having complex geometry, particularly in the higher dimension, is often
a bottleneck in finite element simulations. Further, for the domains with
curved boundaries, the boundary conditions are merely approximated.
Hence, the accuracy is very poor near the boundary. These inherent
difficulties of mesh-based finite element method motivate intensive
research on mesh-free methods (cf. [4,5] and the references therein). In
this context Höllig, Reif and Wipper in [20] introduced WEB-spline
based mesh-free finite element method which uses weighted extended
B-splines on regular grids as basis functions.
The reason we choose WEB-spline method is that, in this method no
mesh generation is required which eliminates a difficult time-consuming
preprocessing step. It also incorporates the Dirichlet boundary condition
which is a common problem of many other mesh-free Galerkin methods.
Due to the choice of shape functions it provides optimal approximation
order in relatively low-dimensional subspaces. Also, it provides a natural
link between geometry description and finite element simulations. To
see some more advantages of WEB-spline method, we refer [18,20].
Much research contributions using this WEB-spline method are made in
the past two decades (cf. [1,2,23,31]).
Recently, the authors in [29] solved the p(x)-Laplacian elliptic
Now as given in [15], instead of dx in the definition of Luxemburg norm,
use of p(x)− 1 dx has no bearing, but in many cases it simplifies the
desired equations. Further, define the variable exponent Sobolev space
W1,p(x) (Ω) by
W 1,p(x) (Ω) = {f ∈ Lp(x) (Ω) : ∇f ∈ Lp(x) (Ω)}
endowed with the norm ‖ f ‖W1,p(x) (Ω) = ‖ f ‖p(x) + ‖ ∇f ‖p(x) . Then it is
well known that Lp(x) (Ω) and W1,p(x) (Ω) are separable reflexive Banach
spaces (cf. [14]). Also, smooth functions are dense in W1,p(x) (Ω). Thus,
1,p(x) 1,p(x)
define the space W0 (Ω) as the closure of C∞
c (Ω) in W (Ω) and then
1,p(x)
the space W0 equipped with the equivalent norm ‖ ∇⋅ ‖p(x) . For
(Ω)
more details on these spaces, we refer [13]. On the other hand, to study
the asymptotic behaviour of the problem, we need to know the Sobolev
space W01,∞ (Ω). Basically, W1,∞ (Ω) be the space of all Lipschitz contin­
1,∞
uous functions defined in Ω and the closure of C∞ c (Ω) in W (Ω) is
properly contained in W01,∞ (Ω) (cf. [11]). Then the notion of the space
W01,∞ (Ω) can be defined as W1,∞ (Ω) ∩ C0 (Ω), that is; the space of all
Lipschitz continuous functions in Ω and those vanish on the boundary
∂Ω.
Now we discuss the asymptotic case of problem (4) when the variable
exponent p(x) is replaced by a “variable infinity” ∞(x) studied in [15]. In
this case, we consider the variable exponent p(x) to be a smooth

270
S. Patra et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 131 (2021) 269–279

function. Precisely, p ∈ C1 (Ω) ∩ W1,∞ (Ω). Then one can identify { ( )}

|∇u| u
W1,∞ (Ω) as the limit space ∩∞
j=1 W
1,jp(x)
(Ω). The authors in [15] studied max Λ∞ − , Δ∞(x) = 0.
u ‖ ∇u ‖∞
the asymptotic case when the variable exponent approaches ∞ through
the sequence {jp(x)}∞ j=1 . For the constant p(x) case, the limit equation is
{ }
|∇u|
max Λ∞ − , Δ∞ (u) = 0, (7) 3. Construction of WEB-spline basis
u
In this section, we follow the terminology used in [18] for describing
where u ∈ W01,∞ (Ω), u > 0,
the construction of the WEB-spline basis functions for the finite element
1 method. WEB-splines are basically a modified version of B-splines which
Λ∞ = (8)
maxx∈Ω dist(x, ∂Ω) are adapted to standard finite element requirements. The use of
B-splines as finite element basis functions is familiar for their flexibility
∑n ∂u ∂u ∂2 u and continuity between points. Uniform B-spline bn of degree n can be
with ∂Ω as the boundary of the domain Ω and Δ∞ (u) = i,j=1 ∂xi ∂xj ∂xi ∂xj
defined in various ways. Among them, we consider the following
is the popular infinity Laplace operator. Now, for variable exponent case
recursion formula to find bn which is provided by Cox and de Boor [12],
the limit equation turns out to be
{ ( )} x n + 1 − x n− 1
|∇u| u bn (x) = bn− 1 (x) + b (x − 1) (13)
max Λ∞ − , Δ∞(x) = 0, (9) n n
u ‖ ∇u ‖∞
∑n with b0 as the characteristic function of the unit interval between zero
where Δ∞(x) u = ∂u ∂u ∂2 u
i,j=1 ∂xi ∂xj ∂xi ∂xj + |∇u|2 ln(|∇u|)〈∇u, ∇lnp〉. The limit and one. Now, by transforming the uniform B-splines bn to the grid
Eqs. (7) and (9) both are interpreted in the viscosity sense. Further, we
hZ : ⋯, − 2h, − h, 0, h, 2h, ⋯
know that, Λ∞ is the minimum of the Rayleigh quotient in the ∞-norm
Λ∞ = min with grid width h > 0, the scaled translated B-splines bnk,h for k ∈ Z can
‖ ∇u ‖∞
u∈W01,∞ (Ω)
(10) be defined as
u∕
=0 ‖ u ‖∞
(x )
bnk,h (x) = bn − k
h
and the distance function Φ(x) = dist(x, ∂Ω) always satisfies the mini­
mization problem. Thus we can write Then a tensor product B-spline is a m-variate B-spline bnk,h with degree ni
‖ ∇Φ ‖∞ 1 in the ith variable, index k = (k1 , ⋯, km ) and grid width h defined as
Λ∞ = = , (11)
‖ Φ ‖∞ r ∏
m
bnk,h (x) := bnkii,h (xi ),
where r is the radius of the largest possible ball inscribed in the domain i=1

Ω. However, the distance function Φ is often not a genuine eigenfunc­

with the convention that n1 = ⋯ = nm and n is equal to the common
tion, since it is not a solution of the limit equation. In particular, when Ω
degree until unless specified explicitly. Fig. 1 shows some initial bivar­
is a square or a parallelepiped. On the contrary, if Ω be a ball, the dis­
iate B-splines (m = 2). Then for a bounded domain Ω⊂Rm , let K be the
tance function Φ is unique solution of the limit equation up to constant
set of indices of relevant B-spline for the domain Ω which is defined as
multiples. Although primarily, the distance function Φ and the obser­
{ ( ) }
vation in (11) play an important role in proving the existence of a vis­ K := k ∈ Zm : supp bnk,h ∩ Ω ∕ =∅
cosity solution to the limit equation.
Before going to see the main result, let us denote
Notice that the relevant B-splines are further classified into inner B-
‖ ∇w ‖jp(x) splines and outer B-splines. We say a relevant B-splines bnk,h as inner B-
Λjp(x) = min , j = 1, 2, ⋯ (12)
w∈C(Ω)∩W0
1,jp(x)
(Ω) ‖ w ‖jp(x) spline, if supp(bnk,h ) has at least one complete grid cell inside Ω otherwise
w∕
=0
it is said to be outer B-spline. Here, we denote the corresponding index
set of the inner B-splines by I and the outer B-splines by J. Then we have
and recall the following key result from [15].
K = I ∪ J (cf. Fig. 2). Now consider the spline space Bnh (Ω) on Ω consist of
∑
Proposition 2.1. lim Λjp(x) = Λ∞ . all linear combinations k∈K ck bnk,h of relevant B-splines. Then, one can
j→∞
Let uj be the minimizer of the Rayleigh quotient in (12) with ‖ uj ‖jp(x) observe that, for a Dirichlet problem on a bounded domain Ω it is not
= 1. Then by the Ascoli’s theorem we can ensure the uniform conver­ feasible to imagine the spline space Bnh (Ω) as a finite element subspace
gence ujν →u∞ in Ω, where {ujν } is a subsequence of {uj } such that {ujν } since the elements in Bnh (Ω) may not conform to the boundary condi­
converges strongly in each fixed Lq (Ω) and {∇ujν } converges weakly in tions. Therefore, to overcome this short come we multiply each bnk,h with
each fixed Lq (Ω). It follows that u∞ is continuous and u∞ ∈ C(Ω) ∩ a suitable weight function ω. Here, we choose weight function as
smooth, positive inside the domain and vanishes on the boundary at an
W01,∞ (Ω) with u∞ ≥ 0, u∞ ∕
≡ 0. Finally, we have the following result from
appropriate rate. Let us recall the definition of a standard weight func­
[15].
tion given in [18].
Theorem 2.1. The limit of the normalized first eigenfunctions is a viscosity
Definition 3.1. A weight function ω of order γ ∈ N0 is continuous on Ω
solution of the equation
and satisfies

271
S. Patra et al.
Fig. 1. The bivariate B-splines b1k,h , b2k,h , b3k,h from left to right, respectively.
Fig. 2. Relevant bivariate quadratic B-splines for the domain Ω, marked at the center of their supports and arrangement of inner (•) and outer (∘) B-splines.
ω(x) ≈ dist(x, Γ)γ , x∈Ω
for a subset Γ of ∂Ω. We assume that Γ has positive (m − 1)-dimensional
measure and sufficiently regular, so that the distance function has a
bounded gradient. If ω is smooth and vanishes linearly on the entire
boundary (γ = 1), it is called a standard weight function. The order γ = 0
corresponding to the trivial weight function ω = 1. There are various
techniques for constructing weight functions. Two such techniques are
the analytical weight function and Rvachev’s R-function method (cf.
[18]). Apart from these types of weight function, there are certain
procedures available in the literature for constructing weight functions
for more general domains which are bounded by free form curves or
surfaces (cf. [18]). The idea of using weight functions to represent
essential boundary conditions is due to Kantorowitsch and Krylow [22]
and has been intensively investigated by Rvachev et al. in [30]. Then,
consider the weighted spline space
{ }
ωBnh (Ω) := span ωbnk,h : k ∈ K
is a possible finite element subspace which conforms to the boundary
272
Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 131 (2021) 269–279
conditions and yields approximations of optimal order. However, the B-
splines which have very small support (outer B-splines) in the domain Ω,
can cause stability problems. It may lead to excessively large condition
numbers of the Galerkin matrix, which affects the convergence of iter­
ative schemes and the accuracy of numerical solutions. Nevertheless, the
outer B-splines must be taken into consideration for stability. Therefore,
to overcome this stability issue we adjoin outer B-splines to the closest
inner B-splines in such a way that the approximation power of the finite
element subspace is retained. This procedure of adjoining outer B-
splines with inner B-splines is known as extension procedure. With the
above motivation, now we are ready to formally define the WEB-splines.
To simplify the notation denote bk = bnk,h in the following definition.
Definition 3.2. For each i ∈ I, weighted extended B-spline Bi is defined
as
[
∑
]
ω
Bi := bi + ei,j bj , (14)
ω(xi ) j∈J
where xi denotes the center of a grid cell in supp(bi ) which is completely
inside the domain Ω. The coefficients ei,j satisfy
S. Patra et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 131 (2021) 269–279

|ei,j |⪯1, ei,j = 0 for ‖ i − j ‖⪰1

which can be written in short Rh (uh ) = ‖ ∇uh ‖2p(x) and Sh (uh ) =
and are chosen so that all weighted polynomials of degree n are con­ ‖ uh ‖2p(x) . Then let us briefly write the procedure of the inverse power
tained in the WEB-space Bh : = span{Bi : i ∈ I}. In [20] a method for method for computing the smallest eigenvalue given in [9].
computing the coefficients ei,j has been derived, where the coefficients
ei,j are just products of univariate Lagrange polynomials and, by scaling, 0
0
̂u h
u h , then compute u0h =
1. Take a random ̂ and Λ0h = Fh (u0h ) =
independent of h. Apparently we have the following result. Sh (̂
0 1/2
uh )
Rh (u0h ).
Theorem 3.2. If for all j ∈ J, I(j) = {i ∈ I : αμ ≤ iμ < αμ +n} is the array 2. Repeat the following steps until it meets stopping criteria:
of inner indices closest to j, then the coefficients j
• compute the inner minimization problem: ̂
u h = argmin{Rh (uh ) −
⎧ m uh
∏ αμ∏ +n− 1
j− 1
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
jμ − l
for i ∈ I(j), 〈uh , sh (uh )〉},
⎪
⎨ μ=1 iμ − l j
j j ̂u h
ei,j =
l=αμ
• consider the normalized factor uh by uh = j 1/2
,
⎪
⎪ Sh (̂
uh)
⎪
⎪ l∕
=iμ
⎪ j j j
⎩ • finally compute Λh = Fh (uh ) = Rh (uh ).
0 else
j j
are admissible for constructing WEB-splines according to Definition 3.2. According to [17], the sequence {(uh , Λh )}j generated by the algo­
For more details regarding the construction of WEB-spline basis func­ rithm discussed above, satisfies
j j− 1
< Fh (uh ) and converges to an
Fh (uh )
tions and their properties, we refer [18,20]. eigenpair (u∗h , Λ∗h ) of the problem (16). Further, one can realize that the
crucial step of the above algorithm for finding eigenpair is to solve the
4. WEB-spline approximation of the eigenvalue problem inner minimization problem. Therefore, it is worthy to discuss the pro­
cedure to solve the inner minimization problem which is given as
In this section, basically we discuss the methodology to obtain the follows.
j− 1
WEB-spline approximation of the first eigenpair of p(x)-Laplacian by the For a given uh , we need to solve the following minimization
inverse power method which was applied earlier in [9] to compute the problem
finite element approximation of the first eigenpair of p(x)-Laplacian. We { 〈 ( )〉}
consider the WEB-space Bh = span{Bi : i ∈ I}, where Bi ’s are the u jh = argminf (uh ) = argmin Rh (uh ) − uh , sh uj−h 1
̂ , (18)
uh uh
WEB-splines of degree one. Also, define a functional Fh : Bh →R+ as
follows where
Rh (uh ) ∫ ⃒ j− 1 ⃒p(x)− 2 j− 1
Fh (uh ) = , (15) 〈 ( )〉 ⃒u (x)⃒ uh (x)uh (x)dx
Sh (uh ) uh , sh uj−h 1 = 2 Ω h
∫ ⃒ j− 1 ⃒p(x) .
⃒u (x)⃒ dx
Ω h
where uh ∈ Bh , Rh : Bh →R+ , Sh : Bh →R+ are to be convex, even,
differentiable and positively 2-homogeneous functions with the addi­ Now, this minimization problem can be solved by using an uncon­
tional assumption Sh (uh ) = 0 only if uh = 0. Since Rh and Sh are differ­ strained optimization technique. Let ukh be the approximate solution to
entiable, the critical points u∗h of Fh satisfy the minimization problem at kth iteration, then the approximate solu­
( ) tion in the next iteration can be found by
( ) ( ) Rh u∗h ( )
∇Fh u∗h = ∇Rh u∗h − ∇S u∗h = 0. uk+1 = ukh + αk dhk , (19)
Sh (u∗h ) h

Let rh (uh ) = ∇Rh (uh ), sh (uh ) = ∇Sh (uh ) and Λ∗h =

Rh (u∗h ) where dkh is a descent direction and αk is a step size which can be ob­
Sh (u∗h ) , then every
tained by backtracking line search technique with Armijo’s rule
critical point u∗h of Fh satisfies the following nonlinear eigenvalue
( )〈 ( ) 〈 ( ) 〉
problem f ukh + αk dhk f ukh + δαk ∇f ukh , dhk ,
( ) ( )
rh u∗h − Λ∗h sh u∗h = 0. (16) where δ = 10− 4 . There are several techniques to choose the descent di­
rection dkh . In the next subsection, we present some of those techniques.
Consider B1 , ⋯, BN are basis functions of Bh , then any uh ∈ Bh can be
written as
4.1. Steepest descent method
∑
N
uh = ξ i Bi , ξi ∈ R. (17)
i=1
In this method the descent direction dkh can be chosen as follows (cf.
[21]): find dkh = wkh ∈ Bh such that for all vh ∈ Bh ,
Now, consider the case
∑
N ∑
N
Rh (uh ) =‖ ξi ∇Bi ‖2p(x) , Sh (uh ) =‖ ξi Bi ‖2p(x) ,
i=1 i=1

273
S. Patra et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 131 (2021) 269–279

⃒ ⃒
∫ ⃒∇ukh ⃒p(x)− 2 ∇ukh 4.3. Quasi-Newton method
∫ ∫ ⃒ j− 1 ⃒p(x)− 2 j− 1 Lh ⃒ ⃒ ⋅∇vh
⃒∇u ⃒ ∇uh .∇vh Ω ⃒ Lh ⃒ Lh
∇wkh .∇vh = 2 Ω h
∫ ⃒ j− 1 ⃒p(x) − 2 ⃒ ⃒p(x) , (20) (a) For the case p(x) ≥ 2: Since, for p(x) ≥ 2 case, the function Rh is
⃒∇u ⃒ ∫ ⃒∇ukh ⃒
convex and twice continuously differentiable. Therefore, the
Ω
Ω h ⃒ ⃒
Ω ⃒ Lh ⃒
second derivative of f at any uh ∈ Bh is well defined. Moreover,
f ′′ (uh ) is symmetric and positive definite. Thus, consider the
where Lh = ‖ ∇ukh ‖p(x) .
descent direction dkh = wh ∈ Bh such that for all vh ∈ Bh ,
4.2. Conjugate gradient method ⃒ ⃒
∫ ⃒∇ukh ⃒p(x)− 2 ∇ukh
∫ ⃒ j− 1 ⃒p(x)− 2 j− 1 Lh ⃒ ⃒ ⋅∇vh
〈 ′′ ( k ) 〉 ⃒∇u ⃒ ∇uh .∇vh Ω ⃒ Lh ⃒ Lh
h
For this method the search direction dkh can be determined by f uh wh , vh = 2 Ω ∫ ⃒ j− 1 ⃒p(x) − 2 ⃒ ⃒p(x) ,
⃒∇u ⃒ ∫ ⃒∇ukh ⃒
following the rule R : Ω h ⃒ ⃒
Ω ⃒ Lh ⃒

(22)
• If k = 0, then dkh = wkh ;
• If k > 0, then where the left hand side of the equation is

〈 ′′ ( k ) 〉
f uh wh , vh
∫ ⃒ k ⃒p(x)− 4 ( k )( )
⃒∇u ⃒ ∇uh ∇ukh
(p(x) − 2)⃒⃒ h ⃒⃒ ⋅∇wh ⋅∇vh
Ω Lh Lh Lh
=2 k
) +
Q(uh
(∫ )(∫ ⃒ k ⃒p(x)− 2 k )
∇ukh p(x)− 2 ∇ukh ⃒∇uh ⃒
⃒ ⃒ ∇uh
| | ⋅∇vh (p(x) − 2)⃒ ⋅∇wh
Ω Lh Lh Ω Lh ⃒ Lh
− 2 ( k )2
Q uh
∫ ⃒ k ⃒p(x)− 2
⃒∇uh ⃒
⃒ ⃒ (23)
⃒L ⃒ ∇wh ⋅∇vh
+2 Ω h k
) +
Q(uh
(∫ )(∫ ⃒ k ⃒p(x)− 2 k )
∇uk ∇uk ⃒∇u ⃒ ∇uh
| h |p(x)− 2 h ⋅∇wh p(x)⃒⃒ h ⃒⃒ ⋅∇vh
Ω Lh Lh Ω Lh Lh
− 2 ( )2 +
Q ukh
(∫ )(∫ )(∫ ⃒ k ⃒p(x) )
∇ukh p(x)− 2 ∇ukh ∇ukh p(x)− 2 ∇ukh ⃒∇u ⃒
| | ⋅∇wh | | ⋅∇vh p(x)⃒⃒ h ⃒⃒
Ω Lh Lh Ω Lh Lh Ω Lh
+2 ( k )3 ,
Q uh

⃒ ⃒p(x)
∫ ⃒∇ukh ⃒
and Q(ukh ) = ⃒ ⃒ .
dhk = wkh + βk dhk− 1 , (21) Ω ⃒ Lh ⃒

∫ In the above equation, one can not see the symmetricity directly.
∇wkh .∇(wkh − wk− 1)
To see that, one has to rewrite second term as (p(x) − 2)[…] = (p(x)
where βk = ∫ Ω h
and wk−h 1 , wkh are obtained by solving (20).
∇wk− − 1 − 1)[…] and fourth term as p(x)[…] = (p(x) − 1 + 1)[…] and then
1 .∇wk− 1
Ω h h

cancel out the common terms. Finally, from the resultant equation
Then dkh is referred as the search direction of Polak-Ribière conjugate
one can verify that f ′′ (ukh ) is symmetric and positive definite.
gradient method [32]. Further in [9], the authors proposed a quadratic
(b) For the case 1 < p(x) < 2: The second derivative f ′′ (ukh ) given in
model for the intermediate minimization problem (18) and consider dkh
as quasi-Newton direction which is addressed in succeeding subsection. Eq. (23) is not defined whenever ∇ukh (x) = 0, for some x.
Therefore, to overcome this problem the authors in [9] consid­
ered the following modifications in f ′′ (ukh ) defined in Eq. (23)

274
S. Patra et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 131 (2021) 269–279

〈 ′′ ( k ) 〉
f uh wh , vh
∫ ) ( k )( k )
∇ukh 2 p(x)− 4 ∇uh ∇uh
(p(x) − 2)((1 − sign|∇ukh |2 ) + | | 2 ⋅∇wh ⋅∇vh
Ω Lh Lh Lh
=2 k
) +
Q(uh
(∫ )(∫ ⃒ k ⃒p(x)− 2 k )
∇ukh p(x)− 2 ∇ukh ⃒∇u ⃒ ∇uh
| | (p(x) − 2)⃒⃒ h ⃒⃒
⋅∇vh ⋅∇wh
Ω Lh Lh Ω Lh Lh
− 2 ( )2 +
Q ukh
∫ ( )
∇uk p(x)− 2 (24)
ϵ2N ⋅(1 − sign|∇ukh |2 ) + | h |2 2 ∇vh ⋅∇wh
L
+2 Ω ) h +
Q(ukh
(∫ )(∫ ⃒ k ⃒p(x)− 2 k )
∇uk p(x)− 2 ∇ukh ⃒∇u ⃒ ∇uh
| h| ⋅∇wh p(x)⃒⃒ h ⃒⃒ ⋅∇vh
Ω Lh Lh Ω Lh Lh
− 2 ( )2 +
Q ukh
(∫ )(∫ )(∫ ⃒ k ⃒p(x) )
∇ukh p(x)− 2 ∇ukh ∇ukh p(x)− 2 ∇ukh ⃒∇u ⃒
| | ⋅∇wh | | ⋅∇vh p(x)⃒⃒ h ⃒⃒
Ω Lh Lh Ω Lh Lh Ω Lh
+2 ( k )3 ,
Q uh

value is unknown and by λ1 (h) we denote the computed value of λ1 for

the grid width h. All the numerical experiments in this paper have been
done in MATLAB and computation time is measured in an intel i7 CORE
where ϵN is a small parameter which depends on N, the dimension of Bh . processor. Now, before going to see the experimental results, first we
Now, for better numerical computation, we replace the terms of the form discuss the way of computation of Luxemburg norm of a function which
) is given below [9].
p(x)− 2
p(x)− 2
|y| y by ((1 − sign|y|2 ) + |y|2 2 y.
5.1. Approximation of the Luxemburg norm
For more arguments and details related to the quasi-Newton direction,
If u is non-zero almost everywhere, then the Luxemburg norm ρ of u
we refer [9].
is implicitly defined by
∫ ⃒
5. Numerical experiments ⃒
⃒u(x)⃒p(x) dx
G(u, ρ) = ⃒ ⃒ − 1=0 (26)
Ω ρ p(x)
In this section, we have performed numerical experiments to find
WEB-spline approximation of the first eigenpair of p(x)-Laplacian for and the derivative of G(u, ρ) with respect to ρ is given by
various exponents in different types of domains using the inverse power ∫
1 ⃒⃒u(x)⃒⃒p(x)
method. In order to speed up the convergence of the algorithm, we use ∂ρ G(u, ρ) = − ⃒ ⃒ dx. (27)
ρ ρ
continuation technique over p(x) given as follows Ω

√̅̅̅̅ Now one can apply Newton’s method to solve (26) for ρ. Notice that for a
t
pt (x) = 2(1 − γt ) + p(x)γ t , γt = , t = 0, ⋯, T, (25) given u, the function G(u, ρ) is a monotonically decreasing convex
T
function (cf. [9]) in ρ. This guarantees the convergence of Newton’s
where number of continuation steps T in above equation can be chosen method whenever the initial guess ρ0 > 0 is chosen such that G(u,
as follows ρ0 ) ≥ 0.
⎧⌈ ⌉ In this work we choose initial guess ρ0 as follows
⎨ maxp(x) if minp(x) ≥ 2, ⎧ (∫ ) ∫
T= 2 ⎪
⎪ |u(x)|p(x) 1 |u(x)|p(x)
⎩ ⎪
⎨ dx pmax , if dx ≥ 1,
⌈. − 3 log(minp(x) − 1)⌉ if minp(x) < 2. Ω p(x) Ω p(x)
ρ0 = (∫ ) ∫
⎪
⎪ |u(x)|p(x) |u(x)|p(x)
Then by using the same initial values and stopping criteria as given in ⎪ 1
⎩ dx pmin , if dx < 1,
[9], we have performed our numerical experiments. In our first three Ω p(x) Ω p(x)

experiments, for solving the inner minimization problem we have used

where pmax = maxp(x) and pmin = minp(x).
three different techniques namely, steepest descent method, conjugate
gradient method, and quasi-Newton method which are discussed in the Example 1. In this example, we consider constant exponent, that is;
previous section. Then from the obtained results of these three methods p(x) = p and Ω as an annulus domain
for different degrees of freedom (DOF), we compare their performance { }
with respect to relative errors and CPU time. We calculate relative error Ω = (x, y) ∈ R2 : r1 (x, y)r2 (x, y) ≥ 0 , where

, where λref represents a reference first eigenvalue as its exact

λref − λ1 (h)
λref

275
S. Patra et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 131 (2021) 269–279

Fig. 3. Profile and contour of the first eigenfunction of p(x)-Laplacian for Example 1.

relative errors by considering λref as the eigenvalue computed by

Table 1 quasi-Newton method with 16641 DOF. From Table 1, we notice that as
Relative errors and CPU times corresponding to the experiment of Example 1.
we increase the DOF, quasi-Newton method outperforms the other two
DOF Quasi-Newton method Conjugate gradient Steepest descent methods, and conjugate gradient method outperforms the steepest
method method descent method with respect to CPU time.
Relative CPU Relative CPU Relative CPU
error time error time error time Example 2. As a second example, we consider the continuous expo­
nent p(x, y) = 5.5 + 4sin(πy) and the shovel type domain,
81 1.7706 × 3.52 sec 1.7706 × 4.99 sec 1.7706 × 3.69 sec
10− 2 10− 2 10− 2
289 1.0116 × 10.94 1.0116 × 16.26 1.0116 × 16.04
sec sec sec Table 2
10− 2 10− 2 10− 2
Relative errors and CPU times corresponding to the experiment of Example 2.
1089 3.1879 × 37.27 3.1879 × 57.35 3.1879 × 57.71
10− 3 sec 10− 3 sec 10− 3 sec DOF Quasi-Newton Conjugate gradient Steepest descent
method method method
4225 7.4421 × 139.87 7.4476 × 189.93 7.4423 × 270.42
10− 4 sec 10− 4 sec 10− 4 sec Relative CPU Relative CPU Relative CPU
error time error time error time

25 4.2890 × 10.53 4.2890 × 35.23 4.2890 × 48.10

1 10− 2 sec 10− 2 sec 10− 2 sec
r1 (x, y) = 1 − x2 − y2 and r2 (x, y) = x2 + y2 − .
4 81 3.0040 × 68.44 3.0041 × 169.78 3.0041 × 287.31
10− 2 sec 10− 2 sec 10− 2 sec
Also, we used the weight function ω = r1 r2 . For p = 1.6, the profile of an
289 6.4340 × 155.44 6.4362 × 334.00 6.4346 × 834.24
approximated first eigenfunction and its contour plot are shown in Fig. 3 10− 3 sec 10− 3 sec 10− 3 sec
corresponding to the eigenvalue λ1 = 18.2537 (cf. [28]). Relative errors 1089 682.80 1864.91 3838.86
1.8634 × 1.8655 × 1.8640 ×
and CPU times for quasi-Newton, conjugate gradient and steepest 10− 3 sec 10− 3 sec 10− 3 sec
descent methods are reported in Table 1. Here, we calculated the

Fig. 4. Profile and contour of the first eigenfunction of p(x)-Laplacian for Example 2.

276
S. Patra et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 131 (2021) 269–279

Fig. 5. Profile and contour of the first eigenfunction of p(x)-Laplacian for Example 3.

computed by quasi-Newton method with 4225 DOF. From Table 3, we

Table 3 can observe that as we increase the DOF, with respect to CPU time,
Relative errors and CPU times corresponding to the experiment of Example 3. conjugate gradient method outperforms the other two methods and
DOF Quasi-Newton method Conjugate gradient Steepest descent quasi-Newton method outperforms the steepest descent method. From
method method this experiment, it is clear that sometimes conjugate gradient method
Relative CPU Relative CPU Relative CPU
performs apparently better than quasi-Newton method and which can
error time error time error time also be observed in Table 8 of Example 3 in [10].
Now, we can observe from the above three experiments that in the
25 7.2900 × 12.53 7.2902 × 10.66 7.2901 × 24.54
10− 2 sec 10− 2 sec 10− 2 sec frame of the WEB-spline based mesh-free method, the quasi-Newton
81 4.0703 × 56.85 45.86 112.69
method performs apparently better than the steepest descent method
4.0729 × 4.0804 ×
10− 2 sec 10− 2 sec 10− 2 sec and conjugate gradient method. From Eqs. (20)-(24) it is clear that
289 2.3954 × 287.50 2.4153 × 242.32 2.4856 × 444.31 calculation of quasi-Newton direction is computationally expensive than
10− 2 sec 10− 2 sec 10− 2 sec the conjugate gradient direction and steepest descent direction. How­
1089 7.1903 × 1366.31 7.9262 × 943.49 8.7835 × 1767.89 ever, since the quasi-Newton method converges faster than the conju­
10− 3 sec 10− 3 sec 10− 3 sec gate gradient method and steepest descent method in the sense that the
number of iterations to achieve certain tolerance is relatively lesser than
the conjugate gradient method and steepest descent method, the total
{ } ( )2
Ω = (x, y) ∈ R2 : r(x, y) ≥ 0 , where r = 1 − x2 − y + x2 − 1 . computation time of the quasi-Newton method in Example 1 and 2 is less
than the conjugate gradient method and steepest descent method. In
The weight function employed in this case is ω = r. For this example, the Example 3 due to less computation in the conjugate gradient direction,
profile of an approximated first eigenfunction and its contour plot are conjugate gradient method takes less CPU time than the quasi-Newton
shown in Fig. 4 corresponding to the eigenvalue λ1 = 3.8312. Relative method. On the other hand, one main drawback of the steepest
errors and CPU times for quasi-Newton, conjugate gradient, steepest descent method is slow convergence near the minimum point due to the
descent algorithms are given in Table 2. We calculated the relative errors small steps towards the descent direction. We also noted that despite the
by considering λref as the eigenvalue computed by quasi-Newton method less number of computations in the steepest decent direction, the
with 4225 DOF. Here also, we can observe from Table 2 that, as we
increase the DOF, quasi-Newton method outperforms the other two
methods and conjugate gradient method outperforms the steepest
descent method with respect to CPU time.
Example 3. In this example, we consider a discontinuous piecewise
constant exponent p(x, y), defined as
{
1.1 if x2 + y2 ≤ 1,
p(x, y) =
10 otherwise,

and domain Ω be the unit square, that is;

{ }
Ω = (x, y) ∈ R2 : 0 ≤ x ≤ 1, 0 ≤ y ≤ 1

The weight function we have considered in this example is ω = x(1 −

x)y(1 − y). The profile of an approximated first eigenfunction and its
contour plot are shown in Fig. 5 corresponding to the eigenvalue λ1 =
4.3825. Relative errors and CPU times for quasi-Newton, conjugate
gradient and steepest descent algorithms are provided in Table 3. We
calculated the relative errors by considering λref as the eigenvalue Fig. 6. Graph of first eigenvalue of jp(x)-Laplacian versus j for the unit disk.

277
S. Patra et al.
Fig. 7. Radial profile of the first eigenfunction of jp(x)-Laplacian for the
unit disk.
steepest descent method takes more CPU time than the quasi-Newton
method and conjugate gradient method.
Example 4. This experiment is performed in order to observe the
asymptotic behaviour of the first eigenvalue and corresponding eigen­
function of p(x)-Laplacian as p(x)→∞, as discussed in Section 2. For that,
here we consider the smooth exponent p(x, y) = 2 + 0.5sin(2πx) and
domain Ω as the unit disk, that is;
{ }
Ω = (x, y) ∈ R2 : r(x, y) ≥ 0 , where r(x, y) = 1 − x2 − y2 .
The weight function used in this instance is ω = r. In Fig. 6, we can
observe that whenever the variable exponent approaches to ∞ via the
sequence {jp(x)}∞
j=1 , the first eigenvalue approaches to 1 /r, where r is
the radius of the largest ball inscribed in the domain and for the unit disk
r = 1. Also, we have plotted the radial profile of the first eigenfunction
which is scaled to have the unit maximum value, along the diameter
parallel to the x-axis and it can be observed from Fig. 7 that the first
eigenfunction approaches to the distance function Φ(x) = dist(x, ∂Ω) as
j→∞, where x = (x; y). Even though the range of j seems to be small (as
we have shown numerical results only up to j = 11), but still we can
observe the asymptotic behaviour of the first eigenpair as p(x)→∞.
6. Conclusions
In this paper, we proposed the WEB-spline based mesh-free finite
element approximation of the first eigenpair of the p(x)-Laplacian by
using an inverse power method. There are limited number of articles in
the literature which discuss the numerical computation of the first
eigenpair of p(x)-Laplacian problem and to the best of our knowledge,
this is the first attempt to use mesh-free method (based on WEB-spline)
for solving eigenvalue problem of p(x)-Laplacian. In order to resolve the
associated inner minimization problem of the inverse power method, we
used three different minimization techniques namely steepest descent,
conjugate gradient and quasi-Newton methods. We compared the per­
formance of those methods in several numerical examples in terms of
their accuracy and efficiency. Also, we studied the asymptotic case of the
problem with variable in infinity and validated numerically the theo­
retical results. Even though the range of j in the sequence {jp(x)} is too
small as we have shown numerical results up to j = 11, but still we can
observe the asymptotic behaviour of the first eigenpair when the vari­
able exponent approaches ∞ via the sequence {jp(x)}.
Here we employed the WEB-spline based mesh-free method by uni­
form node spacing. However, the nonuniform WEB-splines [19] can also
be used in place of uniform WEB-splines for discretization. Furthermore,
one can apply the element-free Galerkin method [25,26] to achieve
278
Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 131 (2021) 269–279
additional freedom in node distribution. The element-free Galerkin
method is a famous meshless method that has the advantage of allowing
the nodes to be randomly distributed inside the domain. So, it will be
worthwhile to compare WEB-spline findings to those obtained using the
element-free Galerkin method.
Declaration of Competing Interest
None.
Acknowledgment
The authors acknowledge anonymous reviewers for their many
insightful suggestions and comments. Also, the authors would like to
thank Prof. Klaus Höllig for his help and suggestions during the revision
of the paper.
References
[1] Apaydin G, Seker S, Ari N. Weighted extended b-splines for one-dimensional
electromagnetic problems. Appl Math Comput 2007;190(2):1125–35.
[2] Apprich C, Höllig K, Hörner J, Reif U. Collocation with WEB–splines. Adv Comput
Math 2016;42(4):823–42.
[3] Bellomi M, Caliari M, Squassina M. Computing the first eigenpair for problems with
variable exponents. J Fixed Point Theory Appl 2013;13(2):561–70.
[4] Belytschko T, Krongauz Y, Organ D, Fleming M, Krysl P. Meshless methods: an
overview and recent developments. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1996;139(1):
3–47.
[5] Belytschko T, Lu YY, Gu L. Element-free Galerkin methods. Int J Numer Method
Biomed Eng 1994;37(2):229–56.
[6] Biezuner RJ, Brown J, Ercole G, Martins EM. Computing the first eigenpair of the
p-Laplacian via inverse iteration of sublinear supersolutions. J Sci Comput 2012;52
(1):180–201.
[7] Biezuner RJ, Ercole G, Martins EM. Computing the first eigenvalue of the
p-Laplacian via the inverse power method. J Funct Anal 2009;257(1):243–70.
[8] Bognár G, Szabó T. Solving nonlinear eigenvalue problems by using p-version of
FEM. Comput Math Appl 2003;46(1):57–68.
[9] Caliari M, Zuccher S. The inverse power method for the p(x)-Laplacian problem.
J Sci Comput 2015;65(2):698–714.
[10] Caliari M, Zuccher S. Quasi-Newton minimization for the p(x)-Laplacian problem.
J Comput Appl Math 2017;309:122–31.
[11] Champion T, De Pascale L. Asymptotic behaviour of nonlinear eigenvalue problems
involving p-laplacian type operators. Proc R Soc Edinburgh Section A 2007;137(6):
1179–95.
[12] De Boor C. A practical guide to splinesvol. 27. Springer-Verlag, New York; 1978.
[13] Diening L, Harjulehto P, Hästö P, Ruzicka M. Lebesgue and Sobolev spaces with
variable exponents. Springer-Verlag, Berlin; 2011.
[14] Fan X, Zhao D. On the spaces Lp(x) and Wm,p(x) . J Math Anal Appl 2001;263(2):
424–46.
[15] Franzina G, Lindqvist P. An eigenvalue problem with variable exponents.
Nonlinear Anal 2013;85:1–16.
[16] Hästö P. The p(x)-Laplacian and applications. J Anal 2007;15:53–62.
[17] Hein M, Bühler T. An inverse power method for nonlinear eigenproblems with
applications in 1-spectral clustering and sparse PCA. Advances in Neural
Information Processing Systems. 2010. p. 847–55.
[18] Höllig K. Finite element methods with B-splines. SIAM, Philadelphia; 2003.
[19] Höllig K, Reif U. Nonuniform web-splines. Comput Aided Geom Des 2003;20(5):
277–94.
[20] Höllig K, Reif U, Wipper J. Weighted extended B-spline approximation of Dirichlet
problems. SIAM J Numer Anal 2001;39(2):442–62.
[21] Huang YQ, Li R, Liu W. Preconditioned descent algorithms for p-Laplacian. J Sci
Comput 2007;32(2):343–71.
[22] Kantorowitsch LW, Krylow WI. Näherungsmethoden der höheren analysis. VEB
Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften, Berlin; 1956.
[23] Kunter FC, Seker SS. 3D web-splines solution to human eye heat distribution using
bioheat equation. Eng Anal Bound Elem 2011;35(4):639–46.
[24] Lê A. Eigenvalue problems for the p-Laplacian. Nonlinear Anal 2006;64(5):
1057–99.
[25] Li X, Dong H. An element-free Galerkin method for the obstacle problem. Appl
Math Lett 2021;112:106724.
[26] Li X, Li S. A linearized element-free Galerkin method for the complex
Ginzburg–Landau equation. Comput Math Appl 2021;90:135–47.
[27] Ly I. The first eigenvalue for the p-Laplacian operator. J Inequalit Pure Appl Math
2005;6(3).
[28] Patra S, Chaudhary S, Srinivas Kumar VVK. Approximation of the first eigenpair of
the p-Laplace operator using WEB-spline based finite element method. Eng Anal
Bound Elem 2019;104:277–87.
[29] Rajashekar N, Chaudhary S, Srinivas Kumar VVK. Minimization techniques for
p(x)-Laplacian problem using WEB-spline based mesh-free method. Int J Comput
Math 2020;97(3):667–86.
S. Patra et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 131 (2021) 269–279

[30] Rvachev VL, Sheiko TI. R-functions in boundary value problems in mechanics. Appl [32] Stein Jr I. Conjugate gradient methods in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal 2005;63
Mech Rev 1995;48(4):151–88. (5):2621–8.
[31] Sana M, Mustahsan M. Finite element approximation of optimal control problem
with weighted extended B-splines. Mathematics 2019;7(5):452–63.

279