Existence and otimality of strong stability reserving linear multiste methods: a duality-based aroach arxiv:504.03930v [math.na] 6 Ar 06 Adrián Németh January 9, 08 Abstract David I. Ketcheson We rove the existence of exlicit linear multiste methods of any order with ositive coefficients. Our aroach is based on formulating a linear rogramming roblem and establishing infeasibility of the dual roblem. This yields a number of other theoretical advances. Introduction In this work we study numerical methods for the solution of the initial value roblem (IVP) u (t) = f(t, u) u(t 0 ) = u 0 t 0 t T, () under the assumtion that the solution is monotone in time: u(t+h) u(t) h 0. () Here u : R R m, and is any convex functional. The theory ursued herein is also relevant when u satisfies a contractivity or ositivity condition. We will usually write f(u) instead of f(t, u) merely to kee the notation simler. We focus on the class of methods for solving () that are known as linear multiste methods (LMMs). To solve () by a linear multiste method, we define a sequence of times t 0 < t <... < t N = T where t n := t n + h, and comute the values u n u(t n ) sequentially by u n = k j= α j u n j + h k j=0 β j f(u n j ). (3) Author email addresses: nemetha@sze.hu, david.ketcheson@kaust.edu.sa. This work was suorted by Award No. FIC/00/05-0000003, made by King Abdullah University of Science and Technology; and by TÁMOP- 4...A-//KONV-0-00: Basic research for the develoment of hybrid and electric vehicles - The Project is suorted by the Hungarian Government and co-financed by the Euroean Social Fund.
Some rescrition must be given for the starting values u 0,..., u k. If β 0 = 0, the method is said to be exlicit; otherwise it is imlicit. We are interested in methods that reserve a discrete version of the monotonicity condition (); namely u n max{ u n,..., u n k }. (4) The backward Euler method achieves (4) under any ste size, as long as f is such that () is satisfied. In order to achieve the discrete monotonicity roerty (4) with exlicit methods, or with imlicit methods of order higher than one, we assume a stronger condition than (). We require that f be monotone under a forward Euler ste, with some restriction on the ste size: u+h f(u) u 0 h h FE (u). (5) Under assumtion (5) it can be shown that any method (3) with non-negative coefficients reserves discrete monotonicity (4) under some time ste restriction. The ste size restriction that guarantees monotonicity is then 0 h Ch FE, where the factor min α j /β j if α j 0 for j k and β j 0 for 0 j k, j k C := β j =0 0 otherwise (6) is known as the threshold factor or strong stability reserving coefficient (SSP coefficient) of the method. Runge Kutta methods with ositive SSP coefficient are subject to restrictive order barriers: exlicit methods have order at most four and imlicit methods have order at most six. SSP linear multiste methods of high order are therefore of articular interest. The objective of the resent work is to investigate existence of methods with C > 0 and bounds on the value of C for methods with a rescribed order of accuracy and number of stes. In this aer we have assumed a fixed ste size; the case of SSP exlicit linear multiste methods with variable ste size is covered in [HKLN].. Previous work Contractive linear multiste methods were studied by Sand, who constructed a family of imlicit methods with arbitrarily high order [San86, Theorem.3] whose number of stes is exonential in the order of accuracy. Later Lenferink deduced many roerties of the otimal methods and threshold factors for low order methods [Len89, Len9]. More recently, such methods have
been studied by Hundsdorfer & Ruuth [HR05, RH05], who consider the effect of secial starting rocedures and of requiring only boundedness rather than strict contractivity or monotonicity. A fast algorithm for comuting otimal methods, along with extensive results, was given in [Ket09].. Scoe and main results Linear multiste methods are closely related to olynomial interolation formulas. We investigate their roerties herein using the framework of linear rogramming and results on olynomial interolants. The main results roved in the resent work are:. Existence of arbitrary order exlicit LMMs with C > 0;. A sharer uer bound on C for imlicit LMMs; 3. Behavior of the otimal value of C for k-ste methods as k. Along the way, we also give a new roof of the known uer bound on C for exlicit LMMs, and a new relation between C for certain imlicit and exlicit classes of LMMs. Formulation as a linear rogramming feasibility roblem By relacing u n with the exact solution u(t n ) in (3) and exanding terms in Taylor series about t n, we obtain the following conditions for method (3) to be consistent of order : k α j = (7a) j= k ) (j m α j mj m β j m0 m β 0 = 0 m ; (7b) j= here and in the rest of the aer, we assign 0 0 the value. A linear multiste method (3) has SSP coefficient at least equal to r > 0 iff β j 0 and α j rβ j 0 for j k, and β 0 0. Thus the roblem of whether there exists a method of order with k stes and SSP coefficient at 3
least r > 0 can be formulated for exlicit methods as [Ket09, LP ]: Find (8) β j 0 δ j 0 for j k such that k ( (δ j + rβ j )j m β j mj m ) = 0 m for 0 m ; j= and for imlicit methods as [Ket09, LP 4]: Find (9) β 0 0 and β j 0 δ j 0 for j k k j= such that (δ j + rβ j ) = and k ( (δ j + rβ j )j m β j mj m ) β 0 0 m = 0 for m. j= In both cases, α j can be obtained for a fixed r via α j = δ j + rβ j for all j k. 3 Otimality conditions for SSP methods In this section we develo the basic tools used in this aer. Our analysis relies on Farkas lemma and on the Duality and Comlementary slackness theorems in linear rogramming (LP), which we now recall; see, e.g. [Sch98]. Proosition 3. (Farkas lemma). Let A R m n be a matrix and let b R m be a vector. The system Ax = b, x 0 is feasible if and only if the system A y 0, b y < 0 is infeasible. Proosition 3. (Duality theorem in linear rogramming). Let A R m n be a matrix and let b R m, c R n be vectors. Consider the rimal-dual air of LP roblems Maximize c x subject to Ax = b and x 0, Minimize b y subject to A y c. If both roblems are feasible, then the two otima are equal. (0a) (0b) Proosition 3.3 (Comlementary slackness theorem). Let A R m n be a matrix and let b R m, c R n be vectors. Consider the rimal-dual air of LP roblems (0a) and (0b). Assume that both otima are finite; let x be an otimal solution to (0a) and let ỹ be an otimal solution to (0b). Then x (b A ỹ) = 0, i.e. if a comonent of x is ositive, then the corresonding inequality in A y c is satisfied by ỹ with equality. 4
Our analysis also relies on the following well-known result of Linear Algebra that can be found in many textbooks, for instance, in [SIF08]. Proosition 3.4 (Rouché Caelli theorem). Let A R m n be a matrix and let b R m be a vector. The system Ax = b has a solution if and only if the rank of its coefficient matrix A is equal to the rank of its augmented matrix, (A b). If a solution exists, then the set of solutions forms an affine subsace of R n of dimension (n rank A). We can now state three simle lemmas. Since the system (a) (c) below is the Farkas-dual of (8), and the system formed by (a) (c) and (d) is the Farkas-dual of (9), Lemma 3. and Lemma 3. are consequences of Farkas s lemma (Proosition 3.) and the observation that the dual variables can be viewed as the coefficients of a olynomial of degree at most. Lemma 3.. Let r R and let k, be ositive integers. The following statements are equivalent: (i) The LP feasibility roblem (8) is infeasible. (ii) There exist y m R for 0 m that satisfy the system m=0 j m y m 0 for j k (a) m=0 ) ( mj m y m + rj m y m 0 for j k (b) y 0 < 0. (iii) There exists a real olynomial q of degree at most that satisfies the conditions (c) q(j) 0 for j k (a) q (j)+r q(j) 0 for j k (b) q(0) < 0. Lemma 3.. Let r R and let k, be ositive integers. The following statements are equivalent: (i) The LP feasibility roblem (9) is infeasible. (ii) There exist y m R for 0 m that satisfy the system defined by (a) (c) and (c) y 0. (d) (iii) There exists a real olynomial q of degree at most that satisfies the system defined by (a) (c) and q (0) 0. (d) 5
Recall that due to the Fundamental theorem of algebra, a real olynomial can be factored in a unique way as q(x) = c 0 m= (x λ m), where c R \{0} is the leading coefficient of q and λ, λ,..., λ 0 C are the roots of q. Moreover, in view of the Comlex conjugate root theorem, the non-real roots of q occur in comlex conjugate airs. The roof of Lemma 3.3 is also based on the formula q (x) q(x) = 0 m= (x λ m ) for the logarithmic derivative of the olynomial q(x) := c 0 m= (x λ m). Lemma 3.3. Let r R, and let q be a non-zero real olynomial of degree 0 > 0. Let c R\{0} be the leading coefficient of q and λ, λ,..., λ 0 C be the roots of q. For any real µ, let s(µ) := {m : m 0, and λ m R, and λ m µ} denote the number of real roots of q that are greater than or equal to µ. Then the following statements hold. (i) The olynomial q satisfies the inequality (a) for some integer j if and only if either of the following is true: j is a root of q; j is not a root of q, and c ( ) s(j) > 0. (3a) (ii) Suose that q satisfies the inequality (a) for some integer j. Then q satisfies the inequality (b) for the same value of j if and only if either of the following is true: j is a multile root of q; j is a simle root of q, and (3a) holds for j; j is not a root of q, and 0 m= j λ m r. (iii) The olynomial q satisfies (c) if and only if 0 is not a root of q and c ( ) s(0) < 0. (3b) (3c) (iv) Suose that q satisfies (c). Then q satisfies (d) if and only if 0 m= λ m 0. (3d) For convenience, we introduce the following notation. Let C ex (k, ) denote the otimal SSP coefficient for exlicit LM methods with k stes and order of accuracy, i.e. C ex (k, ) = su C, k-ste exlicit methods of order 6
and let C im (k, ) denote the otimal SSP coefficient for imlicit LM methods with k stes and order of accuracy, i.e. C im (k, ) = su k-ste imlicit methods of order C. Our urose is to study the behavior ofc ex (k, ) and C im (k, ). It turns out to be convenient to study olynomials that satisfy the following conditions, in lace of (a) (d): q(j) 0 for j k (4a) q (j)+ r q(j) 0 for j k (4b) q(0) = 0 q (0) = 0. (4c) (4d) Before we roceed to our main lemmas, Lemma 3.6 and Lemma 3.7, we need to rove two auxiliary results relating these sets of conditions. Lemma 3.4. Let r R and let k, be ositive integers. Suose that q is a real olynomial of degree 0 < 0 that satisfies the system (a) (c). Then there exists a non-zero real olynomial q(x) := c m= (x λ m ) of degree that { satisfies the system (4a) (4c), has a leading } coefficient c = ±, and whose roots satisfy λ m H := z C : Im(z) k, and 0 Re(z) k for all m. Proof. Let r R, and let k, be ositive integers. Suose that q is a real olynomial of degree 0 that satisfies the system (a) (c). Let us consider the olynomial ˆq(x) := q(x) q(0). This is a non-zero real olynomial of degree 0 that satisfies the system (4a) (4c); furthermore, it fulfills the condition ˆq(j) > 0 for all j k. Let ˆq(x) := ĉ 0 m= (x ˆλ m ) be the factored form of ˆq, let M := { ˆλ m : m 0, and ˆλ m R, and ˆλ m < 0} be the number of negative real roots of ˆq, and let us take ĉ c := ( ) M+ 0 ĉ { ˆλ m if m 0 and ˆλ m H λ m := q(x) := c k m= if m 0 and ˆλ m H, or if 0 < m (x λ m ). It is clear that q satisfies condition (4c), and that c = ±. 7
Let ŝ and s be defined as in Lemma 3.3 with resect to ˆq and q, resectively. Because of statements (i) and (ii) of Lemma 3.3, we have ĉ ( )ŝ(j) > 0 and 0 m= (j ˆλ m ) r for all j k. Since the non-real roots of ˆq come in comlex conjugate airs, s(j) ŝ(j)+ M+ 0 mod for all j k. Hence c ( ) s(j) = ĉ/ ĉ ( )ŝ(j) > 0 for all j k, and thus statement (i) of Lemma 3.3 imlies that q satisfies condition (4a). Now we rove that q satisfies condition (4b). To achieve this, we show that the contribution of the roots of q to the left hand side of (3b) is less than or equal to that of the roots of ˆq. Let us consider first a µ C such that Im(µ) > k. Then j µ + j µ = (j Re(µ)) (j Re(µ)) +(Im(µ)) Im(µ) > k j k for all j k. Let us consider now a µ C such that either Re(µ) > k or Re(µ) < 0. Then for all j k. It follows that j µ + j µ = m= (j Re(µ)) (j Re(µ)) +(Im(µ)) Re(µ) j > j k j λ m 0 m= j λ m 0 m= j ˆλ m r for all j k. If k is not a root of q then the same holds for j = k; otherwise k is a root of q and c ( ) s(k) > 0. In both cases, statement (ii) of Lemma 3.3 imlies that q satisfies condition (4b), which comletes the roof. Lemma 3.5. Let r R and let k, be ositive integers. Suose that q is a real olynomial of degree 0 < 0 that satisfies the system formed by (a) (c) and (d). Then there exists a non-zero real olynomial q(x) := c m= (x λ m ) of degree that { satisfies the system (4a) (4d), has a leading } coefficient c = ±, and whose roots satisfy λ m H := z C : Im(z) k, and 0 Re(z) k for all m. Proof. Let r R, and let k, be ositive integers. Suose that q is a real olynomial of degree 0 that satisfies the system formed by (a) (c) and (d). Let us consider the olynomial ˆq(x) := q(x) q(0). This is a non-zero real olynomial of degree 0 that satisfies the system formed by (4a) (4c) and (d), furthermore it fulfills the condition ˆq(j) > 0 for all j k. Let ˆq(x) := ĉ 0 m= (x ˆλ m ) be the factored form of ˆq, and let ŝ be as in Lemma 3.3 with resect to ˆq. Statement (i) of Lemma 3.3 imlies that ĉ ( )ŝ() > 0 and statement (ii) of Lemma 3.3 imlies that either ĉ ( )ŝ(0) > 0 or 0 is root of ˆq of multilicity at least two. In both 8
cases there are two distinct indices m 0 = m 0, such that ˆλ m0 = 0, and ˆλ m R, and 0 ˆλ m <. Let M be the number of negative real roots of ˆq, as in the roof of Lemma 3.4, and let us take ĉ c := ( ) M+ 0 ĉ ˆλ m if m 0 and ˆλ m H and m = m λ m := 0 if m = m k if m 0 and ˆλ m H, or if 0 < m q(x) := c m= (x λ m ). We can roceed in the same way as in Lemma 3.4 to show that this q satisfies the claims of the lemma. Lemma 3.6. Let r 0 and let k, be ositive integers. Then the following statements are equivalent. (i) C ex (k, ) r. (ii) There exists a non-zero real olynomial q of degree at most that satisfies the system (4a) (4c). Proof. We can check that the olynomial q(x) := x of degree one satisfies the system (a) (c) with r = for any value of k, and thus Lemma 3. imlies thatc ex (k, ), and hence it is finite, for all ositive integers k and. Now we are ready to show the equivalence of statements (i) and (ii). Proof that statement (ii) imlies statement (i). Suose that q := c 0 m= (x λ m) is a nonzero real olynomial of degree 0 < 0 that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = ρ 0 0 for some ositive integers k and, but C ex (k, ) = ρ > ρ 0. Since 0 is a root of q, we can assume without the loss of generality that λ,..., λ = 0 and λ +,..., λ 0 = 0 for some integer 0 < 0. Let us choose 0 < ǫ < so that q(x) := ǫ ǫ ρ ρ 0, and let us take the olynomial { c m= (x λ m) if c m= ( λ m) < 0, c (x ǫ) m= (x λ m) if c m= ( λ m) > 0. Let s and s be as in Lemma 3.3 with resect to q and q, resectively. By construction, both the leading coefficients and the set of real roots greater than ǫ of q and q coincide, and thus s(j) = s(j) for all j k. 9
We can check that q satisfies conditions (a) and (c). Moreover, in view of Lemma 3.3, if j is not a root of q for some j k then (3b) holds for the roots of q with r = ρ 0, and thus ρ 0 + ρ ρ 0 = 0 m= m= m= j λ m = m= j λ m + j ǫ j λ m + j ǫ. j λ m +( 0 ) j m= ǫ j(j ǫ) m= j λ m + j + j λ m j ǫ ρ ρ 0 Hence, in view of statement (ii) of Lemma 3.3, q satisfies condition (b) with r = ρ 0+ρ. Now Lemma 3. imlies that C < ρ 0+ρ for any k-ste exlicit LM methods with order of accuracy, which leads to the contradiction C ex (k, ) ρ 0+ρ < ρ. This comletes the first art of the roof. Proof that statement (i) imlies statement (ii). Let k, be ositive integers. We can check that if a non-zero real olynomial q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = ρ then it satisfies the same system with any r > ρ. Hence it is enough to rove that there is a non-zero real olynomial q of degree at most that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (k, ). LetHbe as in Lemma 3.4. By the definition of C ex (k, ) and due to Lemma 3., there is a real sequence (r n ) n= and a corresonding sequence of real olynomials (q n) n= of degree at most, such that lim n r n = C ex (k, ), and for all n, the olynomial q n satisfies the system (a) (c) with r = r n. Due to Lemma 3.4, for any ositive integer n, there exists a non-zero real olynomial q n (x) := c n m= (x λ n,m ) of degree, such that q n satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = r n, moreover c n = ± and λ n,m H for all m. Since ( λ n,, λ n,,..., λ n, ) H for all n, and since H C is closed and bounded, the Bolzano Weiertrass theorem imlies the existence of a strictly increasing sequence of indices (n l ) l=, such that for all m, the limit λ m := lim l λ nl,m exists, λ m H and non-real λ occur in comlex conjugate airs, moreover c nl = c for all l. A continuity argument yields that q(x) := c m= (x λ m ) is a real olynomial of degree that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (k, ), which comletes the roof. Lemma 3.7. Let r 0 and let k, be ositive integers. Then the following statements are equivalent. (i) C im (k, ) r. (ii) There exists a non-zero real olynomial q of degree at most that satisfies the system (4a) (4d). Proof. The roof is essentially the same as for Lemma 3.6. The results of this aer are based on analysing the olynomials q aearing in Lemma 3.6 and in Lemma 3.7, and for this reason, we establish some basic roerties of these olynomials in Lemma 3.8 and in Lemma 3.9. 0
Lemma 3.8. Let k, be ositive integers and let r C ex (k, ) be a real number. Then there exists a non-zero real olynomial q that solves the system (4a) (4c) and has the following roerties.. The degree of q is exactly.. The real arts of all roots of q excet for 0 lie in the interval [, k]. 3. All real roots of q are integers. 4. The multilicity of the root 0 is. For j k, if j is a root of q then its multilicity is. 5. For even, k is a root of q of multilicity. For odd, if k is a root of q then its multilicity is. 6. The olynomial q is non-negative on the interval [0, k]. Moreover, if C ex (k, ) > 0 and r = C ex (k, ) then every non-zero real olynomial q of degree at most that solves the system (4a) (4c) has these roerties. Proof. Case r = C ex (k, ) > 0. Suose that ositive integers k, are such that C ex (k, ) > 0. We know thatc ex (k, ) <, see the roof of Lemma 3.6. Let q(x) := c 0 m= (x λ m) be a non-zero real olynomial of degree 0 that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = ρ 0 := C ex (k, ); the existence of such a olynomial is guaranteed by Lemma 3.6. Due to condition (4c), λ m0 = 0 for some m 0 0. Now we show that q has all the required roerties. Proofs for roerties and. Suose that either roerty or does not hold for q. Let M := {m : m 0, and m = m 0, and λ m [, k]} be the number of roots of q with real arts outside the interval [, k], not counting λ m0. Let us take c := ( ) M+ 0 c { λ m if m 0 and Re(λ m ) [, k], or if m = m 0 λ m := k if m 0 and m = m 0 and Re(λ m ) [, k], or if 0 < m q(x) := c m= (x λ m ). By following the argument in the roof of Lemma 3.4, we can show that q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = ρ for some 0 ρ < ρ 0. Now Lemma 3.6 yields C ex (k, ) ρ < ρ 0, which contradicts our choice of q. Proof for roerty 3. Suose that roerty 3 does not hold for q. Let us take { λ m if m 0 and λ m R λ m := λ m if m 0 and λ m R q(x) := c 0 m= (x λ m ).
Let s and s be as in Lemma 3.3 with resect to q and q, resectively. We can check that s(j) = s(j) for all 0 j k. Moreover, if j is a root of q for some integer j k then j is a root of q too, with at least the same multilicity. If, however, j is not a root of q for some integer 0 j k then, assuming that at least one root has moved, we have 0 m=0 (j λ m) > 0 m=0 (j λ m ). In view of Lemma 3.3, the olynomial q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = ρ for some 0 ρ < ρ 0, which again leads to a contradiction. Proof for roerty 4. We already know that roerties 3 hold for q. Suose that λ m = λ m = λ m3 = j for some integer j k and indices m < m < m 3. Then we can take { λ m if m = m 3 λ m := λ m if m = m 3 q(x) := c m= (x λ m ), and, as before, we can check that the olynomial q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = ρ for some 0 ρ < ρ 0, which leads to a contradiction. Hence if j is a root of q for some integer j k then its multilicity is at most. Suose now that j 0 is a simle root of q for some integer j 0 < k, and suose further that j is not a double root of q for all integers j 0 < j k. Let s be as in Lemma 3.3, and let j 0 < j k be the smallest integer that is not a double root of q. Then c ( ) s(j0) = c ( ) s(j), and in view of statements (i) and (ii) of Lemma 3.3, q does not satisfy the inequalities (4a) and (4b) for both j = j 0 and j = j. Therefore if j 0 is a simle root of q for some integer j 0 < k then j is a double root of q for all j 0 < j k, and thus λ m = k for some index m. Now we can take { λ m if m = m λ m := j 0 if m = m q(x) := c m= (x λ m ), and check that q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = ρ for some 0 ρ < ρ 0, which again leads to a contradiction. Proofs for roerties 5 and 6 Proerty 5 is a consequence of roerties -3 and 4, and the fact that non-real roots come in comlex conjugate airs. Proerty 6 is a consequence of roerties 3 and 4. Case r > C ex (k, ) > 0. We can see that if C ex (k, ) > 0 and q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (k, ) then q satisfies the same system with any r > C ex (k, ), and thus the claim of the lemma holds true in this case. CaseC ex (k, ) = 0 and < k+. In this case, we can construct a non-zero real olynomial q of degree that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = 0 and has roerties 6, by alying the
transformations resented in the roof of the first case to an arbitrary non-zero real olynomial q of degree 0 that satisfies the same system with r = 0. Case C ex (k, ) = 0 and k+. For odd we define q(x) := x(x k+i) k (x k i) k k j= (x j), and for even we define q(x) := x(x k+i) k (x k i) k (k x) k j= (x j). We can check that these olynomials satisfy all the required conditions. Lemma 3.9. Let k and be ositive integers and let r C im (k, ) be a real number. Then there exists a non-zero real olynomial q that solves the system (4a) (4d), and has the following roerties.. The degree of q is exactly.. The real arts of all roots of q excet for 0 lie in the interval [, k]. 3. All real roots of q are integers. 4. The multilicity of the root 0 is. For j k, if j is a root of q then its multilicity is. 5. For odd, k is a root of q of multilicity. For even, if k is a root of q then its multilicity is. 6. The olynomial q is non-negative on the interval [0, k]. Moreover, if C im (k, ) > 0 and r = C im (k, ) then every non-zero real olynomial q of degree at most that solves the system (4a) (4d) has these roerties. Proof. The roof is essentially the same as for Lemma 3.8. The following two lemmas rovide a way to analyze both the coefficient structure and the uniqueness of otimal SSP LM methods with a given number of stes and order of consistency. Lemma 3.0. Let ositive integers k, be such that C ex (k, ) > 0. Assume that (δ j ) k j= and (β j) k j= are the coefficients of an exlicit LM method of order with k stes and with SSP coefficient C ex (k, ), and let q be any non-zero olynomial of degree at most that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (k, ). Let us define the sets I := {j : j k, and q(j) = 0} and J := {j : j k, and q (j)+c ex (k, )q(j) = 0}, and let us introduce the vectors a j := (j m ) m=0 for 0 j k, and b j := ( mj m +C ex (k, )j m ) m=0 for j k. Then the following statements hold. (i) If δ j = 0 for some j k, then q(j) = 0. (ii) If β j = 0 for some j k, then q (j)+c ex (k, )q(j) = 0. (iii) If the vectors a j for j I and b j for j J are linearly indeendent then there exists no other exlicit LM method of order with k stes and SSP coefficient C ex (k, ). (iv) The olynomial q can be chosen so that the vectors a j for j I and b j for j J san a dimensional subsace of R +. 3
Proof. The roofs of statements (i) and (ii) of the Lemma. Suose that ositive integers k and, coefficients ( δ j ) k j= and ( β j ) k j=, and the olynomial q satisfy the conditions of the lemma. Let us consider the following rimal dual air of LP roblems. Maximize 0 with resect to (δ j ) k j=,(β j) k j= subject to (8) with r = C ex(k, ). (5) Minimize y 0 with resect to (y m ) m=0 subject to (a) and (b) with r = C ex(k, ). (6) On the one hand ( δ j ) k j=, ( β j ) k j= is an otimal solution to (5), and on the other hand y m := 0 for 0 m is a feasible solution to (6). Therefore both (5) and (6) are feasible, and thus the Duality theorem in LP (Proosition 3.) imlies that the two otima are equal, hence a feasible solution (y m ) m=0 to (6) is otimal if and only if y 0 = 0. Let ỹ m := q (m) (0)/m! for 0 m be the coefficients of q. Then ỹ is an otimal solution to (6), because m=0 ỹmj m = q(j) 0 for all j k, and m=0 ( mjm +C ex (k, )j m )ỹ m = q (j)+c ex (k, ) q(j) 0 for all j k, and ỹ 0 = q(0) = 0. Suose that δ j = 0 for some j k. Then the Comlementary slackness theorem (Proosition 3.3) imlies that q(j) = m=0 jm ỹ m = 0. Similarly, if β j = 0 for some j k then the Comlementary slackness theorem imlies q (j)+c ex (k, ) q(j) = 0. Hence the roofs of statements (i) and (ii) are comlete. The roof of statement (iii) of the Lemma. Suose that ositive integers k and, coefficients ( δ j ) k j= and ( β j ) k j=, and the olynomial q satisfy the conditions of the lemma. Suose further that the vectors a j for j I and b j for j J are linearly indeendent. Consider the system of linear equations obtained from the equality constraints of the LP roblem (5) by fixing δ j for j I and β j for j J to zero. In view of statements (i) and (ii) of the lemma, this system is satisfied by the ossibly non-zero coefficients (δ j ) j I and (β j ) j J of any otimal method. Since the matrix of this system is formed by the column vectors a j for j I and b j for j J, its columns are linearly indeendent, and thus the Rouché Caelli theorem (Proosition 3.4) imlies that ( δ j ) j I, ( β j ) j J is a unique solution to this system. From this, the third statement of the lemma follows. The roof of statement (iv) of the Lemma. Suose that ositive integers k and, coefficients ( δ j ) k j= and ( β j ) k j=, and the olynomial q satisfy the conditions of the lemma. Suose further that the olynomial q is chosen so that it satisfies the maximum number of inequalities in (4a) (4b) with equality. Let ỹ m for m be as before. We show that ỹ satisfies at least one inequality in (a) (b) with strict inequality. Suose that is not the case, then for all j k integers j is a multile root of q, and thus q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = 0. Lemma 3.6 leads to the contradiction C ex (k, ) = 0. Consider the homogeneous system of linear equations formed by the equation y 0 = 0 and by the equations corresonding to the binding inequalities in (a) (b) with r = C ex (k, ). The matrix of this system is formed by the row vectors a j for j I {0} and b j for j J. The rank of this matrix is at most, since ỹ is a non-zero solution to the corresonding homogeneous system with + variables. Suose now that the rank of the matrix is less than 4
. Then, by the Rouché Caelli theorem (Proosition 3.4), we have a ŷ solution to the system such that ŷ and ỹ are linearly indeendent, and ŷ is an otimal solution to the LP roblem (6), too. Now, for aroriate real numbers c and ĉ, the vector c ỹ+ĉ ŷ is a non-zero otimal solution to the LP roblem (6), and it satisfies more inequalities in (a) (b) with equality than ỹ does. We can check that the corresonding olynomial Q(x) := m=0 ( c ỹ m + ĉ ŷ m )x m satisfies all the conditions of the lemma, and it satisfies more inequalities in (4a) (4b) with equality than q does, which contradicts our choice of q. Hence the rank of the matrix is recisely. Consider again the linear system for the ossibly non-zero coefficients (δ j ) j I and (β j ) j J, obtained from the equality constraints of the LP roblem (5). The matrix of the system is formed by the column vectors a j for j I and b j for j J, and the right hand side of the system is just a 0. Since this system is consistent, the Rouché Caelli theorem imlies that the rank of its matrix is equal to the rank of its augmented matrix. We already know that the rank of its augmented matrix is recisely, from which the roof of the statement follows. Lemma 3.. Let ositive integers k and > be such that C im (k, ) > 0. Assume that (δ j ) k j= and (β j ) k j=0 are the coefficients of an imlicit LM method of order with k stes and with SSP coefficient C im (k, ), and let q be any non-zero olynomial of degree at most that satisfies the system (4a) (4d) with r = C im (k, ). Let us define the sets I := {j : j k, and q(j) = 0} and J := {j : 0 j k, and q (j)+c im (k, )q(j) = 0}, and let us introduce the vectors a j := (j m ) m=0 for 0 j k, and b j := ( mj m +C im (k, )j m ) m=0 for j k, and b 0 = (0,, 0,..., 0). Then the following statements hold. (i) If δ j = 0 for some j k, then q(j) = 0. (ii) If β j = 0 for some 0 j k, then q (j)+c im (k, )q(j) = 0. (iii) If the vectors a j for j I and b j for j J are linearly indeendent then there exists no other imlicit LM method of order with k stes and SSP coefficient C im (k, ). (iv) The olynomial q can be chosen so that the vectors a j for j I and b j for j J san a dimensional subsace of R +. Proof. The roof is essentially the same as that of Lemma 3.0. 4 Uer bounds on SSP coefficients In this section we derive uer bounds on SSP coefficients using Lemma 3.6 and Lemma 3.7. Proosition 4. is just the classical uer bound on the SSP coefficient for exlicit LM methods, found in [Len89]. 5
Proosition 4.. Let k, be ositive integers. Then the following inequality holds. k k if k and k C ex (k, ) 0 if > k if k = =. Proof. Let us consider q(x) := x(k x) (, a olynomial of degree. If k then q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = k max k )., 0 If k = and then q satisfies the same system with r = 0. Finally, if = k = then q satisfies the same system with r =. The statement of the roosition follows from Lemma 3.6. Theorem 4. can be viewed as a refinement of the uer bound C im (k, ) for all k and roved in [Len9, HR05]. Theorem 4.. Let k and be arbitrary integers. Then the following inequality holds. k k if k and k C im (k, ) 0 if > k if k = and =. Proof. Let us consider q(x) := x (k x) (, a olynomial of degree. If k then q satisfies the system (4a) (4d) with r = k max k )., 0 If k = and 3 then q satisfies the same system with r = 0. Finally, if k = and = then q satisfies the same system with r =. The statement of the theorem follows from Lemma 3.7. Proosition 4.. The following statements hold. (i) Suose that ositive integers and k are such that C ex (k, ) > 0. Then there exists an exlicit LM method of order with k stes, and with C = C ex (k, ). (ii) Suose that integers and k are such that C im (k, ) > 0. Then there exists an imlicit LM method of order with k stes, and with C = C im (k, ). Proof. The roof of statement (i) is based on Lemma 3. and Proosition 4., and on the fact that if a olynomial q solves the system () with r = r 0 > 0, then the olynomial q := q q(0)/ solves the same system with r = r for some 0 < r 0 < r. Similarly, the roof of statement (ii) is based on Lemma 3. and Theorem 4.. Theorem 4. resents a relation between the otimal SSP coefficients for exlicit and imlicit LM methods of different orders. This inequality, together with the existence of arbitrary order imlicit LM methods with C > 0 roved in [San86], imlies the existence of arbitrary order LM methods with C > 0. Using this aroach, we can show that C ex (k, ) > 0 for a given order, if the number of stes is at least k +. In contrast, Theorem 5. roves the existence of exlicit LM methods with C > 0 for a much lower number of stes. 6
Theorem 4.. Let k, be ositive integers. Then the following inequality holds. C im (k, ) C ex (k, ). (7) Proof. Lemma 3.6 guarantees the existence of a non-zero real olynomial q of degree at most that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (k, ). Let us consider the olynomial q := q. Clearly q is a non-zero real olynomial of degree at most. We can check that q satisfies conditions (4a), (4c) and (4d). The above q satisfies condition (4b), too, with r = C ex (k, ). This is because q (j) + C ex (k, ) q(j) = q(j) ( q (j)+c ex (k, )q(j) ) 0 for all j k. Here we have used that q satisfies conditions (4a) and (4b) with r = C ex (k, ). Hence q satisfies the system (4a) (4d) with r = C ex (k, ), and thus Lemma 3.7 imlies the inequality (7). 5 Existence of arbitrary order SSP exlicit LMMs In [Len89, Theorem.3(ii)], it is asserted that there exist exlicit contractive linear multiste methods of arbitrarily high order; the justification cited is [San86, Theorem.3]. The latter Theorem does rove existence of arbitrary-order contractive linear multiste methods; however, it uses an assumtion that if α j = 0 for some j, then also β j = 0, which cannot hold for exlicit methods (since necessarily α 0 = 0 and β 0 = 0). Hence the methods constructed there are necessarily imlicit. In view of Lemma 3.6, the existence of arbitrary-order SSP exlicit LMMs can be shown by roving the infeasibility of (4a), (4b) and (4c) with r = 0 and a large enough k for all. This can be achieved by alying Markov brothers-tye inequalities to the olynomial q. These inequalities give bounds on the maximum of the derivatives of a olynomial over an interval in terms of the maximum of the olynomial, and they are widely alied in aroximation theory. Proosition 5. (Markov brothers inequality [Mar90, Mar9]). Let P be a real univariate olynomial of degree n. Then for all l ositive integers. max x P(l) (x) n (n )(n ) (n (l ) ) max 3 5 (l ) P(x) x Theorem 5.. Let ositive integers k and be such that k > ( ) 6 +. (8) Then C ex (k, ) > 0, that is, there exists an exlicit LM method with k stes, order of accuracy and C > 0. 7
Proof. Suose to the contrary that C ex (k, ) = 0 for some and k satisfying (8). Then by Lemma 3.6, there exists a non-zero real olynomial q of degree at most that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = 0. We choose this q to satisfy roerties and 6 of Lemma 3.8. That is, q is of degree, and q(x) 0 for all x [0, k]. First we define a := max x [0,k] q(x) and b := max x [0,k] q (x), and we introduce the olynomial P(x) := q((x+) k ) a. By construction, max x [,] P(x) = a and max x [,] P (x) = k 4 b, and thus the Markov brothers inequality for the second derivative (Proosition 5. with l = ) alied to P imlies that b k 4 a ( ). (9) 6 Now we give an uer estimate for a in terms of b. By the definition of b, and since q (j) 0 for all integers j k due to condition (4b), we have q (x) b( x) for x [0, ], and q (x) b max(x j, j+ x) for x [j, j+ ] for all integers j k. From this, we get that 0 q (x) dx b and j+ q (x) dx b 4 for all for all integers j k. j Since q is a olynomial of degree, it follows that { j Z : 0 j k, and max x [j,j+] q (x) > 0 }, that is, q can take ositive values on at most subintervals of [0, k] of length one. Since q(0) = 0 and q is non-negative on [0, k], the interval [0, ] is one of these subintervals. Now, because of q(0) = 0, we can estimate a from above by k a max(q (x), 0) dx b + b 4 = b +. (0) 4 0 Combining (0) and (9) yields that k ( ) +, 6 which contradicts the assumtion of the theorem. Hence C ex (k, ) > 0 for all k and ositive integers satisfying (8). 6 Asymtotic behavior of the otimal ste size coefficient for large number of stes Since for all ositive, C ex (k, ) and C im (k, ) are trivially non-decreasing in k, the following definitions are meaningful. C ex (, ) := lim k C ex (k, ) C im (, ) := lim k C im (k, ) 8
Due to the existence of arbitrary order exlicit and imlicit LM methods with C > 0 (Theorem 5.), and due to the uer bounds on SSP coefficients (Proosition 4. and Theorem 4.), 0 < C im (, ) for all ositive, and 0 < C im (, ) for all. Theorem 6.. Let be a ositive integer. Then the following statements hold. (i) If is odd then there exists a ositive integer K such that for all integers k K C ex (k, ) = C ex (, ). () (ii) If is even then there exists a ositive integer k such that for all integers k > k k C ex(, ) C ex (k, ) k k. () Proof. For ositive integers and n, let L(, n) denote the smallest whole number L such that for all k large enough that C ex (k, ) > 0, there exists a olynomial q(x) := c m=0 (x λ m) of degree that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (k, ), and whose roots satisfy {m : m, Re(λ n ) [0, L]} n; (3) if no such L exist, then we define L(, n) :=. Let N() denote the largest n ositive integer such that L(n, ) <. Because of roerties 3 and 4 of Lemma 3.8, N() is odd for all. We break the roof into a number of stes. Ste. Let integers k and be such that C ex (k, ) > 0, and let q be a olynomial that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (k, ). We can check that q(x) := (k x) q(x), a olynomial of degree +, satisfies the same system with r = max ( 0, r 0 k ), and thus Lemma 3.6 imlies that C ex (k, + ) max ( 0,C ex (k, ) k ). Hence Cex (k, ) is strictly decreasing in until it reaches 0. Ste. Suose that N() = for some ositive integer. We choose the ositive integer K so that C ex (K, ) > 0 and K L(, )+ /C ex (K, ). Such a K exists, because C ex (k, ) is non-decreasing in k. Let q be a olynomial of degree that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (K, ) and k = K, and whose roots satisfy (3) with L = L(, ) and n =. We can check that q satisfies the inequality (4a) for all j > K. In view of statement (ii) of Lemma 3.3 and because of m= j λ m m= j Re(λ m ) j L(, ) C ex(k, ), q satisfies the inequality (4b) with r = C ex (K, ) for all j > K. Therefore q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (K, ) for all k K, and thus Lemma 3.6 imlies that C ex (k, ) C ex (K, ) for all k K. Since C ex (k, ) is non-decreasing 9
in k, this means that C ex (k, ) = C ex (K, ) for all k K. Hence for all ositive, N() = imlies that condition () holds for an aroriate choice of K. Ste 3. Suose that N() = holds for some ositive integer, and suose that q is a olynomial of degree that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (, ) for all ositive k, and whose roots satisfy (3) with L = L(, ) and n =. Such a q exists in view of Ste. Let us define µ := /C ex (, ), and let us introduce q(x) := (x (4µ+ L(, )) x + (4µ+ L(, )) + 4µ ) q(x), a olynomial of degree +. We can check that q satisfies the inequality (4a) for all ositive j, and that q satisfies condition (4c). Using the inequality /(j λ)+/(j λ) / Im(λ), we can show, in a similar way as in Ste, that q satisfies the inequality (4b) with r = 3 4 C ex(, ) for all j L(, )+µ. Using that /(j λ)+/(j λ) is decreasing in j in the range 0 j Re(λ) Im(λ), we can show that q satisfies the inequality (4b) with r = C ex (, ) (L(, )+ 4µ)/((L(, )+ 4µ) + 4µ ) for all j < L(, )+µ. Therefore q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with the maximum of the above exressions for r for all ositive k, and thus Lemma 3.6 imlies that ( ) 3 C ex (, +) max 4 C (L(, )+ 4µ) ex(, ),C ex (, ) (L(, )+ 4µ) + 4µ. Hence for all ositive, N() = imlies that C ex (, ) > C ex (, +). Ste 4. Suose that N() = N( 0 ) = 0 for some > 0 ositive integers, and let ǫ > 0 be arbitrary. In view of Ste, there exists a ositive integer K 0 such that C ex (k, 0 ) = C ex (, 0 ) for all k K 0. Let us define L := max(l(, 0 ), K 0 ) and K := L+( 0 )/ǫ. Since N() = 0, we can choose k > K so that there exists a q(x) := c m= (x λ m) olynomial that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (k, ), and whose roots satisfy the conditions Re(λ ),..., Re(λ 0 ) [0, L] and Re(λ 0 +),..., Re(λ ) K. Let us introduce q := c ( ) 0 0 m= (x λ m), a olynomial of degree 0. We can check that q satisfies the conditions of statement (i) of Lemma 3.3 for all ositive j, and that q satisfies condition (4c). Moreover, q satisfies the conditions of statement (ii) of Lemma 3.3 with r = C ex (k, )+ǫ for all j L, since m=0 j λ m = 0 m=0 + j λ m m= 0 + j λ m 0 m=0 0 +( 0 ) j λ m L K = m=0 j λ m ǫ for all j L. Now Lemma 3.3 imlies that q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (k, )+ǫ. From this, Lemma 3.6 imlies that C ex (k, )+ǫ C ex (L, 0 ) = C ex (K 0, 0 ) = C ex (, 0 ). Since ǫ > 0 is arbitrary and C ex (, ) is non-increasing in, this means that C ex (, ) = C ex (, 0 ). Hence N() = N( 0 ) = 0 imlies that C ex (, ) = C ex (, 0 ). Furthermore if = 0 + then is even, and thus roerty 5 of Lemma 3.8 guarantees that λ = k. Then a similar reasoning yields that N() = N( ) = imlies C ex (, ) C ex (k, ) k L for all k > L. The roof of statement (i) of the Theorem. Clearly, N() = holds, due to condition (4c). 0
Assume now that N(j+ ) = j+ holds for all integers 0 j m. Since N() and N() is odd, we have N(m+) = N(j 0 + ) for some integer 0 j 0 m. Suose that j 0 < m. Then Ste 4 imlies that C ex (m+ ) = C ex (j 0 + ), which contradicts the result of Ste 3. Therefore N(m+ ) = m+. By induction we conclude that N() = for all odd ositive integers. Finally, Ste imlies statement (i) of the Theorem. The roof of statement (ii) of the Theorem. Let be an arbitrary even ositive integer. Then N() = 0 for some odd ositive integer 0 <, since N() and N() is odd. We already know that N( 0 ) = 0, thus Ste 4 imlies that C ex (, ) = C ex (, 0 ). Suose that 0 =. Then Ste 3 imlies thatc ex (, ) = C ex (, 0 ) > C ex (, ), which contradicts the fact that C ex (, ) is non-increasing in. Therefore 0 =, and thus Ste 4 imlies that C ex (, ) C ex (k, ) k k for a fixed k and for all k > k. For k large enough, the inequality k C ex(, ) C ex (k, ) follows from Ste and the fact that C ex (k, ) is non-decreasing in k. Theorem 6.. Let be an arbitrary integer. Then the following statements hold. (i) If is even then there exists a ositive integer K such that for all integers k K C im (k, ) = C im (, ). (4) (ii) If is odd then there exists a ositive integer k such that for all integers k > k k C im(, ) C im (k, ) k k. (5) Proof. The roof is essentially the same as that of Theorem 6.. The roofs of the following two theorems make use of the assumtion that ste sizes are fixed. Theorem 6.3. Let be an odd ositive number, and let K be the smallest ositive integer such that C ex (K, ) = C ex (, ). Then for all k K there is a unique otimal exlicit LM method with k stes, order of consistency and SSP coefficient C ex (, ), and for different values of k, the non-zero coefficients of the unique otimal methods coincide. Moreover, there is a finite sequence of ositive integers < j +, and that the coefficients j, j,..., j, such that < j < j + < j < j + <... < j of the otimal method satisfy δ j = 0 for all j k, and that if β j = 0 for some j k then j {, j, j +,..., j, j + }. Proof. Suose that and K satisfy the conditions of the theorem. Theorem 6. guarantees the existence of such a K for all odd ositive integers. Let us set κ := K. Then C ex (κ, ) = C ex (, ) > 0, and in view of Lemma 3.6 and roerty of Lemma 3.8, there exists a q olynomial of degree that satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (, ) and k = κ.
First we show that q satisfies the inequality (4a) for all j κ with strict inequality. Suose to the contrary that q(j 0 ) = 0 for some ositive integer j 0 κ. If j 0 > K then q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (, ) = C ex (K, ) and k = K, but does not satisfy roerty of Lemma 3.8, which is a contradiction. Similarly, if j 0 K then the olynomial q(x) := q(x j 0 ) satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (, ) = C ex (K, ) and k = K, but fails to satisfy roerty of Lemma 3.8, which is again a contradiction. Hence none of the inequalities in (4a) hold with equality. Since q +C ex (, )q is a olynomial of degree, it satisfies at most inequalities in (4b) with equality. Because of statement (iv) of Lemma 3.0 and due to q(j) > 0 for all j κ, we can choose q so that the number of binding inequalities in (4b) is recisely. Then q (0)+C ex (, )q(0) = q (0) < 0 because of roerties 4 and 6 of Lemma 3.8. Let J and b j for j κ be as in Lemma 3.0. and only if J = {, j, j +,..., j, j < j < j + <... < j < j We can see that (4b) holds for all j κ if + } for a sequence of integers j, j,..., j satisfying + κ. Now roerty of Lemma 3.8 imlies that q(j) > 0 for all j > κ. We can see that q (j)+c ex (, )q(j) > 0 for all j > κ. This is because the set J contains all the roots of q +C ex (, )q. It follows that q satisfies the system (4a) (4c) with r = C ex (, ) for all ositive k. Suose that δ j and β j for j k are the coefficients of an exlicit LM method with k K stes, order of consistency, and SSP coefficient C ex (, ). Proosition 4. guarantees the existence of such a method for all k K. Statement (i) of Lemma 3.0 imlies that δ j = 0 for all j k, and statement (ii) of Lemma 3.0 imlies that if β j = 0 for some j k, then j J. Since b j for j J are linearly indeendent (by statement (iv) of Lemma 3.0 and our choice of q), statement (iii) of Lemma 3.0 imlies that there is a unique otimal method with SSP coefficient C ex (, ) for all k K. The ossibly non-zero coefficients of this unique otimal method, namely β j for j J, satisfy the same linear system for all k K. Thus for different values of k, the non-zero coefficients of the unique otimal methods coincide. Theorem 6.4. Let be an even ositive number, and let K be the smallest ositive integer such that C im (K, ) = C im (, ). Then for all k K there is a unique otimal imlicit LM method with k stes, order of consistency and SSP coefficient C im (, ), and for different values of k, the non-zero coefficients of the unique otimal methods coincide. Moreover, there is a finite sequence of ositive integers < j +, and that the coefficients j, j,..., j, such that < j < j + < j < j + <... < j of the otimal method satisfy δ j = 0 for all j k, and that if β j = 0 for some 0 j k then j {0,, j, j +,..., j, j + }. Proof. The roof is essentially the same as for Theorem 6.3.
References [HKLN] Yiannis Hadjimichael, David Ketcheson, Lajos Lóczi, and Adrián Németh. Strong stability reserving exlicit linear multiste methods with variable ste size. Prerint available from htt://arxiv.org/abs/504.0407. [HR05] [Ket09] [Len89] [Len9] Willem Hundsdorfer and Steven J. Ruuth. On monotonicity and boundedness roerties of linear multiste methods. Mathematics of Comutation, 75:655 67, 005. David I. Ketcheson. Comutation of otimal monotonicity reserving general linear methods. Mathematics of Comutation, 78(67):497 53, Se 009. H W J Lenferink. Contractivity-reserving exlicit linear multiste methods. Numerische Mathematik, 55:3 3, 989. H W J Lenferink. Contractivity-reserving imlicit linear multiste methods. Mathematics of Comutation, 56:77 99, 99. [Mar90] AA Markov. On a question by DI Mendeleev. Zaiski Imeratorskoi Akademii Nauk, ages 4, 890. [Mar9] VA Markov. On functions of least deviation from zero in a given interval. St. Petersburg, 89. [RH05] Steven J. Ruuth and Willem Hundsdorfer. High-order linear multiste methods with general monotonicity and boundedness roerties. Journal of Comutational Physics, 09:6 48, 005. [San86] J Sand. Circle contractive linear multiste methods. BIT Numerical Mathematics, 6:4, 986. [Sch98] Alexander Schrijver. Theory of linear and integer rogramming. John Wiley & Sons, 998. [SIF08] Lawrence E Sence, Arnold J Insel, and Stehen H Friedberg. Elementary linear algebra. Pearson/Prentice Hall, 008. 3