2016
DOI: 10.1007/s13370-016-0406-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Uniform boundary stabilization for the finite difference discretization of the 1-D wave equation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Proof: The first limit is proved in [5]. The second limit follows from the same argument together with Theorem 3.…”
Section: Semi-discretizations Of (1) In the X−variablementioning
confidence: 78%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Proof: The first limit is proved in [5]. The second limit follows from the same argument together with Theorem 3.…”
Section: Semi-discretizations Of (1) In the X−variablementioning
confidence: 78%
“…The proof outlined in [5] is based off of the similar decomposition technique as in [23] yet the "direct Fourier filtering" is implemented to the control-free model, ξ = 0 in (1). The major drawback of the exponential stability results in both [5] and [23] is that the proof of the exponential stability result solely relies on an observability result of the control-free model. This together with the decomposition argument make the maximal decay rate analysis, and therefore the analysis of finding the optimal feedback gain to achieve the maximal decay rate, more complicated.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This phenomenon is due to the fact that the semi-discrete dynamics lead to high-frequency spurious solutions which propagate with arbitrary small velocity and make the discrete controls diverge when the mesh-size h goes to zero. We notice that the uniform controllability question is closely related to the uniform observability [3,8,16] and the uniform stabilization problems for the discrete systems [5,9,25].…”
Section: Abdeladim El Akri and Lahcen Maniarmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…. , ψ N ) and the matrix −∂ 2 h is defined by (9). Now, we expand the initial data ϕ 0 h , ϕ 1 h , ψ 0 h , ψ 1 h on the basis (e n (h)) 1≤n≤N given by (11)…”
Section: Abdeladim El Akri and Lahcen Maniarmentioning
confidence: 99%