A partial data inverse problem for the Convection-diffusion equation
Suman Kumar Sahoo, Manmohan Vashisth

TL;DR
This paper investigates the inverse problem of uniquely determining the convection term and density coefficient in a convection-diffusion equation using partial boundary measurements.
Contribution
It provides new theoretical results on the uniqueness of recovering multiple unknown coefficients from partial boundary data in convection-diffusion equations.
Findings
Proves uniqueness of the inverse problem under certain conditions
Establishes stability estimates for the inverse problem
Extends previous results to partial boundary measurements
Abstract
In this article, we study the unique determination of convection term and the time-dependent density coefficient appearing in a convection-diffusion equation from partial Dirichlet to Neumann map measured on boundary.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
A partial data inverse problem for the Convection-diffusion equation
Suman Kumar Sahoo*†* and Manmohan Vashisth*‡*
† TIFR Centre for Applicable Mathematics, Bangalore 560065, India.
E-mail: [email protected]
‡ Beijing Computational Science Research Center, Beijing 100193, China.
E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
Abstract.
In this article we study the inverse problem of determining the convection term and the time-dependent density coefficient appearing in the convection-diffusion equation. We prove the unique determination of these coefficients from the knowledge of solution measured on a subset of the boundary.
Keywords: Inverse problems, parabolic equation, Carleman estimates, partial boundary data.
**Mathematics subject classification 2010: ** 35R30, 35K20.
1. Introduction
Let with , be a bounded simply connected open set with boundary. For , let and denote its lateral boundary by . We consider the following initial boundary value problem
[TABLE]
Throughout this article, we assume that for and . Let us denote by
[TABLE]
and by
[TABLE]
Before going to the main context of the article, let us briefly mention about the well-posedness of the forward problem. Following [14], define the spaces and by
[TABLE]
As shown in [14] (see also [45]) that for , Equation (1.1) admits a unique solution and the operator given by
[TABLE]
is well-defined for such that , for . Note that if and are smooth enough then is given by
[TABLE]
where stands for the outward unit normal vector to and solution to (1.1). Motivated by this and [14], we define the Dirichlet to Neumann (DN) map by
[TABLE]
where denotes the dual of space and is solution to (1.1) with Dirichlet boundary data equal to . Then from ([14], see Section ), we have that DN map defined by (1.2) is continuous from to .
In the present article we first consider the problem of unique recovery of coefficients and appearing in (1.1) from the information of DN map measured on a subset of . It is well-known [see [53]] that one cannot determine coefficient uniquely from DN map measured on and this is because of the gauge invariance associated with . So one can only hope to recover uniquely upto a potential term however the coefficient can be determined uniquely (see Theorem 2.1 in §2 for more details). Later as a corollary of Theorem 2.1, we consider the problem of determining time-dependent coefficients and appearing in (1.1) from the partial information of DN map . Using some extra assumption on and Theorem 2.1, we show that time-dependent coefficients and can be determined uniquely from the knowledge of DN map measured on a part of (see Corollary 2.2 below in §2 for more details).
The initial boundary value problem (1.1) is known as a convection-diffusion equation with constant diffusion. The coefficients and are called convection term and density coefficient respectively. The convection-diffusion equations appear in chemical engineering, heat transfer and probabilistic study of diffusion process etc.
Determination of the coefficients from boundary measurements appearing in parabolic partial differential equations have been studied by several authors. Isakov in [33] considered the problem of determining time-independent coefficient for the case when in (1.1) from the DN map and he proved the uniqueness result by showing the density of product of solutions (inspired by the work of [54]) in some Lebesgue space. Avdonin and Seidman in [2] studied the problem of determining time-independent density coefficient appearing in (1.1) by using the boundary control method pioneered by Belishev, Kurylev, Lassas and others see [1, 4, 37] and references therein. In [23] Choulli proved the stability estimate analogous to the uniqueness problem considered in [33]. In [25] problem of determining the first order coefficients appearing in a parabolic equations in one dimension from the data measured at final time is studied. Cheng and Yamamoto in [16] proved the unique determination of convection term (when in (1.1)) from a single boundary measurement in two dimension. Gaitan and Kian [30] using the global Carleman estimate used for hyperbolic equations [see [12]] proved the stable determination of time-dependent coefficient in a bounded waveguide. Choulli and Kian in [21] proved the stability estimate for determining time-dependent coefficient from the partial DN map. For more works related to parabolic inverse problems, we refer to [8, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, 30, 34, 35, 46] and the references therein. We also mention the work of [3, 5, 9, 11, 27, 41, 42, 43] related to dynamical Schrödinger equation and the work of [10, 28, 29, 49, 50, 51] for hyperbolic inverse problems. We refer to [15, 17, 47] for steady state convection-diffusion equation. Recently Caro and Kian in [14] established the unique determination of convection coefficient together with non-linearity term appearing in the equation from the knowledge of DN map measured on .
Inspired by the work of [21], we consider the problem of determining the full first order space derivative perturbation of heat operator from the partial DN map. We have proved our uniqueness result by using the geometric optics solutions constructed using a Carleman estimate in a Sobolev space of negative order and inverting the ray transform of a vector field which is known only in a very small neighbourhood of fixed direction . For elliptic and hyperbolic inverse problems these kind of techniques have been used by several authors. Related to our work, we refer to [13, 26] for the elliptic case and to [6, 7, 32, 36, 38, 39, 40, 44] for the hyperbolic case.
The article is organized as follows. In §2 we give the statement of the main result. §3 contains the boundary Carleman estimate. In §4 we construct the geometric optics solutions using a Carleman estimate in a Sobolev space of negative order. In §5 we derive an integral identity and §6 contains the proof of main Theorem 2.1 and Corollary 2.2.
2. Statement of the main result
We begin this section by fixing some notation which will be used to state the main result of this article. Following [13] fix an and define the -shadowed and -illuminated faces by
[TABLE]
of where is outward unit normal to at . Corresponding to , we denote the lateral boundary parts by . We denote by and where and are small enough open neighbourhoods of and respectively in .
Since is bounded and , so we can choose a smallest such that where is a ball of radius with center at origin. Now we define admissible set of vector fields appearing in (1.1) by
[TABLE]
We first prove the uniqueness result for time-independent convection coefficient and time-dependent density coefficient . More precisely we prove the following theorem:
Theorem 2.1**.**
Let and be two sets of coefficients such that are time-independent and for . Let be the solutions to (1.1) when and for be the DN maps defined by (1.2) corresponding to . Now if
[TABLE]
then there exists a function such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
provided for .
In Theorem 2.1 if we take some extra assumption on convection term then we can prove the uniqueness result for full recovery of even for the case when for are time-dependent. The precise statement of this is given in the following Corollary.
Corollary 2.2**.**
Let and be two sets of time-dependent coefficients such that and for . Let be the solutions to (1.1) when and for be the DN maps defined by (1.2) corresponding to . Now if
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
then we have
[TABLE]
provided for .
Remark 2.3**.**
The additional assumption (2.3) on convection term in Corollary 2.2 have been considered in prior works as well. See for example [9, 24] for the determination of vector field term appearing in the dynamical Schrödinger equation and also in [14] for non-linear parabolic equation.
3. Boundary Carleman estimate
In this section we prove a Carleman estimate involving the boundary terms for the operator . We will use this estimate to control the boundary terms appearing in integral identity given by (5.9) where no information is given.
Theorem 3.1**.**
Let where is fixed. Let such that
[TABLE]
If and then there exists depending only on and such that
[TABLE]
holds for large.
Proof.
Let
[TABLE]
and denote by
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Now let
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Next we estimate each of for . Now is
[TABLE]
We consider each term separately on right hand side of the above equation. Using integration by parts and the fact that , we have
[TABLE]
holds for any . Thus we have
[TABLE]
Following the proof of [21, Lemma ] we have
[TABLE]
where is the radius of smallest ball such that . Now consider
[TABLE]
Combining Equations (3.6),(3.7) and (3.8) we get
[TABLE]
Next we estimate .
[TABLE]
Using (3.9) and (3.10) in (3.5) we get
[TABLE]
Now since , therefore taking large enough and using the Poincaré inequality, we have
[TABLE]
holds for large and depending only on , and . Now after substituting in (3.11), we get
[TABLE]
This completes the proof of Carleman estimate given by (3.1). ∎
4. Construction of geometric optics solutions
In this section, we construct the exponentially growing solution to
[TABLE]
and exponentially decaying solution to
[TABLE]
where given by
[TABLE]
is a formal adjoint of the operator . We construct these solutions by using a Carleman estimate in a Sobolev space of negative order as used in [26] for elliptic case and in [39, 44] for hyperbolic case. Before going further following [39] we will give some definition and notation, which will be used later. For , define space by
[TABLE]
with the norm
[TABLE]
where denote the space of all tempered distribution on and is the Fourier transform with respect to space variable . We define by
[TABLE]
here and denote the Fourier transform and inverse Fourier transform respectively with respect to space variable . With this we define the symbol class of order by
[TABLE]
With these notations and definitions, we state the main theorem of this section.
Theorem 4.1**.**
- (1)
Exponentially growing solutions* Let be as defined above. Then for large there exists a solution to*
[TABLE]
of the following form
[TABLE]
where for arbitrary, we have
[TABLE]
and satisfies the following
[TABLE] 2. (2)
Exponentially decaying solutions* Let be as before. Then for large there exists a solution to*
[TABLE]
of the following form
[TABLE]
where for arbitrary, we have
[TABLE]
and satisfies the following
[TABLE]
Proof of the above theorem is based on a Carleman estimate in a Sobolev space of negative order. To prove the Carleman estimate stated in Proposition 4.2, we follow the arguments similar to one used in [26, 39, 44] for elliptic and hyperbolic inverse problems.
Proposition 4.2**.**
Let and be as in Theorem 3.1. Then for large enough, we have
- (1)
Interior Carleman estimate for Let , then there exists a constant independent of and such that
[TABLE]
holds for satisfying for . 2. (2)
Interior Carleman estimate for Let be as before then there exists a constant independent of and such that
[TABLE]
holds for satisfying for .
Proof.
- (1)
Proof for (4.7) Since
[TABLE]
therefore we have
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Writing as
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Now from (3.4), we have Hence using the arguments similar to Theorem 3.1, we have
[TABLE]
for some constant independent of and . The above estimate can be written in compact form as
[TABLE]
Next using the pseudodifferential operators techniques, we shift the index by in the above estimate. Let us denote by a bounded open subset of such that . Fix satisfying and consider the following
[TABLE]
Using the composition of pseudodifferential operators [31, Theorem 18.1.8] we have
[TABLE]
Using (4.11) and (3.9) we have
[TABLE]
holds for large. Now consider
[TABLE]
Using the boundedness of the coefficients, we have
[TABLE]
Hence using the inequality as used in (3.5) we get
[TABLE]
Now let such that in where . Fix in the above equation and using
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
we get
[TABLE]
for large . Thus finally, we have
[TABLE]
holds for such that and large. 2. (2)
(Proof for (4.8)) follows by exactly the same argument as that for (4.7).
∎
Proposition 4.3**.**
Let , and be as in Theorem 3.1.
- (1)
Existence of solution to For large enough and there exists a solution of
[TABLE]
and it satisfies
[TABLE]
where is a constant independent of . 2. (2)
Existence of solution to \mathcal{L}^{*}_{A,q}$$) For large enough and there exists a solution of
[TABLE]
and it satisfies
[TABLE]
where is a constant independent of .
Proof.
- We will give the proof for existence of solution to and the proof for follows by using similar arguments. The proof is based on the standard functional analysis arguments. Consider the space as a subspace of . Define the linear operator on by
[TABLE]
Now using the Carleman estimates (4.7), we have
[TABLE]
holds for with . Hence using the Hahn-Banach theorem, we can extend the linear operator to . We denote the extended map as and it satisfies
[TABLE]
Since is bounded linear functional on therefore using the Riesz representation theorem there exists a unique such that
[TABLE]
with . Now for satisfying . Choosing in the above equation, we get . Using the expression for from (3.3) and the fact that and , we get that . Hence we have .
Next we will show that for . To prove this we choose where and . Using this choice of in (4.15), we have
[TABLE]
Now using integration by parts and the fact that , we get
[TABLE]
The above identity holds for any satisfying . Therefore, we conclude that for . This completes the proof of first part of Proposition 4.3 .
∎
4.1. Proof of the Theorem 4.1
Using expressions and from (4.1) and (4.2) respectively and
[TABLE]
we have the equation for is
[TABLE]
where . Next using Proposition 4.3, there exists solution to
[TABLE]
and it satisfies the following estimate
[TABLE]
where is a constant independent of . This completes the construction of solution for and existence of the solution for , follows in a similar way.
5. Integral identity
This section is devoted to proving an integral identity which will be used to prove the main result of this article. We derive this identity by using the geometric optics solutions constructed in §4. Let be the solutions to the following initial boundary value problems with vector field coefficient and scalar potential for .
[TABLE]
Let us denote
[TABLE]
Then is solution to the following initial boundary value problem:
[TABLE]
Let of the form given by (4.4) be the solution to following equation
[TABLE]
Also let of the form given by (4.1) be solution to the following equation
[TABLE]
Since the right hand side of (5.3) lies in therefore using ([23], Theorem ) we have and Next consider the following
[TABLE]
After following the arguments used in [14], see Proposition 2.3$$], we get that
[TABLE]
Also multiplying (5.3) by and integrating over , we have
[TABLE]
where in deriving the above identity we have used the following: , and on . Now using Equation (5.6) and the fact that in , with in , we get,
[TABLE]
This gives us
[TABLE]
Using (2.2), we have . Finally using Equations (5.7), (5.8) and , in (5.6), we get
[TABLE]
Next we need to estimate the right hand side of above equation. This we will do in the following lemma:
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let for solutions to (5.1) with of the form (4.1). Let and be of the form (4.4). Then
[TABLE]
for all such that .
Proof.
Using the expression of from (4.4), in the right-hand side of (5.9), we have
[TABLE]
where in the last step of above inequality we have used the trace theorem. Now using Equation (4.6), we get
[TABLE]
For , define
[TABLE]
then from the definition of it follows that for all with . Using this we obtain
[TABLE]
Now for and with . Using this in above equation, we get
[TABLE]
for . Now using the Carleman estimate (LABEL:bdryesti) and Equation (5.3), we get
[TABLE]
Using expression for from (4.1) and Equation (4.3), we have
[TABLE]
Hence using this in (LABEL:Estimate_over_the_boundary_terms), we get
[TABLE]
This completes the proof of lemma. ∎
6. Proof of theorem 2.1 and Corollary 2.2
In this section, we prove the uniqueness results. Since from (5.9), we have
[TABLE]
Now using Equation (5.10), we have
[TABLE]
After dividing the above equation by and taking , we have
[TABLE]
Next using the expression for and from (4.1) and (4.4) respectively, we have
[TABLE]
This after using the expressions for and from Equations (4.2) and (4.5) respectively, we get
[TABLE]
. Since the above identity holds for all , therefore we get
[TABLE]
where for all with . Now decompose and using this in the above equation, we have
[TABLE]
here denotes the Lebesgue measure on . After substituting , we get
[TABLE]
Now
[TABLE]
Combining this with (6.4), we get
[TABLE]
Now using the decomposition in the above equation, we get
[TABLE]
Thus we have the ray transform of vector field is vanishing in a very small enough neighbourhood of fixed direction . In order to get the uniqueness for vector field term , we need to invert this ray transform which we will do in the following lemma:
Lemma 6.1**.**
Let and be a real-valued time-dependent vector field with for all . Suppose for each we have
[TABLE]
for all with , for some and for all . Then for each there exists a such that .
Proof.
The proof uses the arguments similar to the one used in [44, 48, 52] for the case of light ray transforms. We assume that is arbitrary but fixed. We have the ray transform of at in the direction of is given by
[TABLE]
Now let be arbitrary and denote . Then we have
[TABLE]
Since has compact support therefore using the Fundamental theorem of calculus, we have
[TABLE]
which gives
[TABLE]
Subtracting (6.7) from (6.6), we get
[TABLE]
where is an matrix with entries
[TABLE]
Define the Fourier transform of with respect to space variable by
[TABLE]
Now decomposing and using (6.8), we get
[TABLE]
The goal is to prove that and for each . From the definition of , it is clear that
[TABLE]
For , equation 6.9 gives us
[TABLE]
Now choosing in (6.10), we get Next we show that when . Let be the standard basis for where is is given by
[TABLE]
and for simplicity we fix . Now let be a fixed vector in . Our first aim is to show that , for all , then later we will prove that for and near . Following [44], consider a small perturbation of vector by
[TABLE]
Then we have is near for near [math] and . Hence using these choices of and in(6.9), we have
[TABLE]
This gives us
[TABLE]
After using the fact that for , we get
[TABLE]
Next we show that for with near . Using the spherical co-ordinates, we choose as follows
[TABLE]
Let be an orthogonal matrix such that , where is given by
[TABLE]
Now choose
[TABLE]
then is near when ’s and are close to [math]. Next choose with , then is close to when is close to zero. Now define by
[TABLE]
Then we have is close for near [math] and is close to when and are close to zero. Also we can see that , hold because of the choice of . Hence using these choices of and choosing in (6.9), we have
[TABLE]
Now since and are linearly independent, therefore we get
[TABLE]
Above equations can be written as
[TABLE]
Now let us define matrix and a n-vector as follows:
[TABLE]
Using these, we have equation (6.13), can be written as
[TABLE]
Note that the matrix is obtained from by removing the second row and it is matrix. From the definition of it is clear that rank of is , so the rank of is . there exists at-least one non-zero minor of order of the matrix . Without loss of generality assume is non-zero minor of order , where is given by
[TABLE]
Now using the fact in (6.14), we have
[TABLE]
where Since has full rank therefore . Also using the fact and , we have
[TABLE]
where is an vector obtained after deleting entry from . Now using (6.15) and (6.16) in (6.14), we get
[TABLE]
which gives us
[TABLE]
Since are compactly supported therefore using the Paley-Wiener theorem, we have
[TABLE]
Fourier inversion formula gives us for and for each . Finally after using the definition of and the Poincaré lemma, there exists a such that for and for each . This completes the proof of Lemma 6.1. ∎
6.1. Proof of Theorem 2.1
Using (6.5) and the fact that is time-independent, we have
[TABLE]
Hence using Lemma 6.1 in the above equation, there exists such that
[TABLE]
This completes the proof for recovery of convection term . Next we prove the uniqueness for the density coefficients for . Since from (6.17), we have for some . Now if replace the pair by where and then using the fact that and Equation (2.2), we get . Now repeating the previous arguments and Lemma 6.1, there exists such that
[TABLE]
which gives us for . Hence using pairs and in (5.9) and the fact that , we get
[TABLE]
where . Now using the expressions for and from (4.1) and (4.4) respectively and taking , we get
[TABLE]
Since is zero outside therefore by using the Paley-Wiener theorem we have for This completes the proof of Theorem 2.1.
6.2. Proof of Corollary 2.2
Using Equation (6.5) and Lemma (6.1), we have for every there exists such that
[TABLE]
Now using Equations (2.3) and (6.18), we have
[TABLE]
Using the unique solvability for the above equation, we have for . Thus from Equation (6.18), we get for . Using this in (5.9) and repeating the previous arguments, we get , .
Acknowledgments
We thank the anonymous referees for useful comments which helped us to improve the paper. MV thanks Ibtissem Ben Aïcha and Gen Nakamura for the discussions on this problem. Both the authors are thankful to Venky Krishnan for stimulating discussions and many useful suggestions which helped us to improve the paper. SS was partially supported by Matrics grant MTR/2017/000837. The work of MV was supported by NSAF grant (No. U1930402).
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] S A Avdonin and M. I. Belishev, Dynamical inverse problem for the Schrödinger equation (BC-method), e d N N Uraltseva Proc. St. Petersburg Mathematical Society vol 10 (Transl. from the Russian by Tamara Rozhkovskaya) (Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society) (Translations. Series 2. American Mathematical Society 214, 1–14 (2005); translation from Tr. St-Peterbg. Mat. Obshch. 10, 3–17 (2004))
- 2[2] S. A Avdonin and T.I. Seidman, Identication of q ( x ) 𝑞 𝑥 q(x) in u t = Δ u − q u subscript 𝑢 𝑡 Δ 𝑢 𝑞 𝑢 u_{t}=\Delta u-qu , from boundary observations, SIAM J. Control Optim. , 33 (1995) 1247-1255.
- 3[3] L. Baudouin and J.-P. Puel, Uniqueness and stability in an inverse problem for the Schrödinger equation, Inverse Problems 23 (2007), no. 3, 1327–1328.
- 4[4] M. I. Belishev, Recent progress in the boundary control method, Inverse Problems , 23 (5):R 1–-R 67, 2007.
- 5[5] M. Bellassoued and D. Dos Santos Ferreira, Stable determination of coefficients in the dynamical anisotropic Schrödinger equation from the Dirichlet-to-Neumann map, Inverse Problems , 26 , 2010, no. 12, 125010, 30, 0266-5611.
- 6[6] M. Bellassoued, D. Jellali and M. Yamamoto, Lipschitz stability for a hyperbolic inverse problem by finite local boundary data, Appl. Anal. , 85 (2006), no. 10, 1219–1243.
- 7[7] M. Bellassoued, D. Jellali and M. Yamamoto, Stability estimate for the hyperbolic inverse boundary value problem by local Dirichlet-to-Neumann map, J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 343 (2008), no. 2, 1036–1046.
- 8[8] M. Bellassoued, Y. Kian and E. Soccorsi, An inverse stability result for non-compactly supported potentials by one arbitrary lateral Neumann observation, J. Differential Equations , 260 , (2016), no. 10, 7535-7562.
