Paper detail

Convergence rates for upwind schemes with rough coefficients

This paper is concerned with the numerical analysis of the explicit upwind finite volume scheme for numerically solving continuity equations. We are interested in the case where the advecting velocity field has spatial Sobolev regularity and initial data are merely integrable. We estimate the error between approximate solutions constructed by the upwind scheme and distributional solutions of the continuous problem in a Kantorovich-Rubinstein distance, which was recently used for stability estimates for the continuity equation by Seis [23]. Restricted to Cartesian meshes, our estimate shows that the rate of weak convergence is at least of order $1/2$ in the mesh size. The proof relies on a probabilistic interpretation of the upwind scheme Delarue and Lagoutière [9]. We complement the weak convergence result with an example that illustrates that for rough initial data no rates can be expected in strong norms. The same example suggests that the weak order $1/2$ rate is optimal.

preprint2017arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.