4

In the paper "DYNAMICAL ASPECTS OF MEAN FIELD PLANE ROTATORS AND THE KURAMOTO MODEL" by L. Bertini, G. Giacomin, AND K. Pakdaman we read

$$\partial_t q_t(\theta)=\frac12\frac{\partial^2q_t(\theta)}{\partial\theta^2}+K\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\left[\left(\int_{\mathbb{S}}\sin(\theta-\theta')q_t(\theta')\,\mathrm{d}\theta'\right)q_t(\theta)\right],\tag{1.9}$$

and further on, we see

$1.3.$ The gradient flow viewpoint. For our purposes the following fact is of crucial importance: $(1.9)$ can be reqritten in the gradient form $$\partial_t q_t(\theta)=\nabla\left[q_t(\theta)\nabla\left(\dfrac{\delta\mathcal{F}(q_t)}{\delta q_t(\theta)}\right)\right],\tag{1.18}$$ where we use $\nabla$ for $\partial_\theta$ for visual impact, $\delta\mathcal{G}(q)/\delta q(\theta)$ is the standard $L^2$ Frechet derivative of the function $\mathcal{G}$ and $$\mathcal{F}(q):=\frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{S}} q(\theta) \log q(\theta)\,\mathrm{d}\theta-\frac K2\int_{\mathbb{S}^2}\cos(\theta-\theta')q(\theta)q(\theta')\,\mathrm{d}\theta\,\mathrm{d}\theta'.\tag{1.19}$$

I am having trouble finding (1.18). I think the difficulty lies in computing the Frechet derivative.

Attempt

When computing a Frechet derivative we are looking for a transformation $A$ such that $$\frac{\|f(x + v) - f(x) - Av\|}{\|h\|} \xrightarrow[h \to 0]{} 0 $$

The norms here are $L^2$ norms on the space of functions on $S = [0,2\pi)$ with the Lebesgue measure.

So $h$ is a vector in $L^2(S)$.

A first question is: What do we mean when we say $ \frac{\delta \mathcal{F(q_t)}}{\delta q_t(\theta)}$? Are we taking the derivative in the direction of the function $q_t$? More precisely are we computing

$$\lim_{h \to 0}\frac{\mathcal{F}(q_t + hq_t) - \mathcal{F}(q_t)}{h} ? \tag{*}$$

In this case we obtain:

$$ \lim_{h\to 0} \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{h}\int_S (q_t(\theta) + h q_t(\theta)) \log(q_t(\theta) + h q_t(\theta)) - q_t(\theta) \log (q_t(\theta)) d\theta\\ - \frac{K}{2}\frac{1}{h}\int_{S^2} \cos(\theta - \theta')\{ [q_t(\theta) + hq_t(\theta)][q_t(\theta') + hq_t(\theta')] - q_t(\theta) q_t(\theta')\} d\theta d\theta' \\ = \frac{1}{2} \int_S q_t(\theta) + q_t(\theta) \log(q_t(\theta))\, d\theta \\ - \frac{K}{2}\int_{S^2} \cos(\theta - \theta')\{ 2q_t(\theta) q_t(\theta')\} d\theta d\theta' $$

However, when computing the derivative $\partial_\theta \frac{\delta \mathcal{F(q_t)}}{\delta q_t(\theta)}$ this is zero, once the value above does not depend on $\theta$ since we integrated on $\theta$.

So this derivative makes no sense for our purposes. Maybe we should note that the denominator of $ \frac{\delta \mathcal{F(q_t)}}{\delta q_t(\theta)}$ has a $\theta$. So this should mean that we are differentiating in a direction that depends on $\theta$. Maybe we should compute

$$ \lim_{h\to 0} \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{h}\int_S (q_t(u) + h q_t(\theta)) \log(q_t(u) + h q_t(\theta)) - q_t(u) \log (q_t(u)) du\\ - \frac{K}{2}\frac{1}{h}\int_{S^2} \cos(u - u')\{ [q_t(u) + hq_t(\theta)][q_t(u') + hq_t(\theta')] - q_t(u) q_t(u')\} du du' \\ = \frac{1}{2} \int_S q_t(\theta) + q_t(\theta) \log(q_t(u))\, du \\ - \frac{K}{2}\int_{S^2} \cos(u -u')\{ q_t(\theta)q_t(u) + q_t(u') q_t(\theta)\} du du' $$

Still I don't see how this could be compatible with (1.9)

Any ideas?

user153330
  • 1,726

1 Answers1

2

EDIT 2:

Another term for $\delta F/\delta q$ is functional derivative, see here.

Original:

When they write $\frac{\delta F(q_t)}{\delta q_t(\theta)}$, I suspect they mean the $L^2$ representative of the Frechet derivative of $F$. For example, the actual Frechet derivative of the functional $$ G:q\mapsto \int g(q(\theta))d\theta $$ is, for each $Q$ in the domain of $G$, $$ DG(Q):q\mapsto \int g'(Q(\theta))q(\theta)d\theta. $$ The $L^2$ (Riesz) representative of this Frechet derivative is $g'(Q)=:\frac{\delta g(Q)}{\delta Q(\theta)}$. In other words, they seem to define $\delta g(Q)/\delta Q$ to be that function in $L^2$ which satisfies $$ DG(Q)(q)=\int \frac{\delta G(Q)}{\delta Q(\theta)}q(\theta)d\theta $$ for all $q$. Using this definition shows (1.9) and (1.18) are equivalent.

EDIT:

To get (1.9) from (1.18), let us start with $\mathcal F_1(q):=\int_{\mathbb S}q(\theta)\log q(\theta)d\theta$. The Frechet derivative $D\mathcal F_1(q)$ evaluated at $h\in L^2$ is $$ D\mathcal F_1(q)(h)=\lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\frac{\mathcal F_1(q+\epsilon h)-\mathcal F_1(q)}{\epsilon}=\int (\ln q(\theta)+1)h(\theta)d\theta. $$ Hence, $$ \frac{\delta\mathcal F_1(q)}{\delta q(\theta)}=\ln q(\theta)+1, $$ since this is the $L^2$ representative of the Frechet derivative.

Let us now do the second integral, $\mathcal F_2(q):=\int_{\mathbb S^2}\cos(\theta-\theta')q(\theta)q(\theta')d\theta d\theta'$. In this case, the Frechet derivative is given by $$ D\mathcal F_2(q)(h)=\int\cos(\theta-\theta')[h(\theta)q(\theta')+q(\theta)h(\theta')]d\theta d\theta'. $$ Let us change variables $(\theta,\theta')\to (\theta',\theta)$ inside the integral of the second term. Then we obtain: $$ D\mathcal F_2(q)(h)=2\int\cos(\theta-\theta')q(\theta')h(\theta)d\theta d\theta'=\int_{\mathbb S}h(\theta)\left(\int_{\mathbb S}2\cos(\theta-\theta')q(\theta')d\theta'\right)d\theta. $$ Therefore, $$ \frac{\delta\mathcal F_2(q)}{\delta q(\theta)}=2\int_{\mathbb S}\cos(\theta-\theta')q(\theta')d\theta'. $$ In sum, using this definition of $\delta F/\delta q$, we have $$ \frac{\delta \mathcal F(q_t)}{\delta q_t(\theta)}=\frac{1}{2}(\ln q_t(\theta) +1)-K\int_{\mathbb S}\cos(\theta-\theta')q_t(\theta')d\theta'. $$ Applying $\nabla$: $$ \nabla\left(\frac{\delta \mathcal F(q_t)}{\delta q_t(\theta)}\right)=\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{q_t}\frac{\partial q_t}{\partial \theta}+K\int_{\mathbb S}\sin(\theta-\theta')q_t(\theta')d\theta', $$ so (1.9) follows after multiplying by $q_t$ and differentiating in $\theta$.

user254433
  • 2,733
  • I don't understand your answer, could you put in more simple words? when it comes to the particular case at our hand. More precisely, can you tell me if we are computing (*)? how do you go from the concrete expression of the formula 1.18 to 1.9? – Conrado Costa Jul 28 '17 at 09:41
  • @ConradoCosta No, we are not computing (*). I will edit my answer to show how to go from (1.18) to (1.9). – user254433 Jul 28 '17 at 10:09
  • @ConradoCosta See the edit. Note that your second attempt where you observe that the denominator depends on $\theta$ is rather close, but an integral sign needs to be removed after differentiating, as well as dividing by $q_t(\theta)$. – user254433 Jul 28 '17 at 10:54
  • It seems to me that in your original explanation, you exchanged the roles of $Q$ and $q$. Instead of $DG(Q):q\mapsto \int g'(Q(\theta))q(\theta)d\theta$ we should write $DG(Q):q\mapsto \int g'(q(\theta))Q(\theta)d\theta$ and maybe the definition should be $g'(q)=:\frac{\delta G}{\delta Q(\theta)}$ – Conrado Costa Aug 02 '17 at 08:03
  • In the actual computation we read $D\mathcal F_1(q)(h)=\lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\frac{\mathcal F_1(q+\epsilon h)-\mathcal F_1(q)}{\epsilon}=\int (\ln q(\theta)-1)h(\theta)d\theta$. Shouldn't it be $D\mathcal F_1(q)(h)=\lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\frac{\mathcal F_1(q+\epsilon h)-\mathcal F_1(q)}{\epsilon}=\int (\ln q(\theta)+1)h(\theta)d\theta.$ – Conrado Costa Aug 02 '17 at 08:06
  • You wrote $\frac{\delta\mathcal F_1(q)}{\delta q(\theta)}=\ln q(\theta)+1$ after computing the increment with the function $h$ Shouldn't we write $\frac{\delta\mathcal F_1(q)}{\delta h(\theta)}=\ln q(\theta)+1$? – Conrado Costa Aug 02 '17 at 08:22
  • @ConradoCosta Yes it should be +1. On the other hand, the notation $DG(Q)$ means that the Frechet derivative is computed at some $q=Q$, not that the dependence on $Q$ is linear (which it isn't, as $\mathcal F_1$ illustrates). You could also write it as $DG_Q$, which maps $q$ to $\int g'(Q)qd\theta$, so that the increment is $DG_Q(q)$. – user254433 Aug 02 '17 at 09:02
  • @ConradoCosta No, the denominator should not be $\delta h(\theta)$, since it represents a "partial derivative" of $\mathcal F_1$ with respect to the variable $q$. – user254433 Aug 02 '17 at 09:06
  • I don't understand yet the expression $DG(Q)$. Let's agree that $G:q\mapsto \int g(q(\theta))d\theta$, in this case, we can write $D G(q)(h) =\lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\frac{ G(q+\epsilon h)- G (q)}{\epsilon}=\int g'(q(\theta))Q(\theta)d\theta.$ Is that correct? In this case shouldn't we denote (in analogy with the notion of directional derivative in $\Bbb{R}^n$) $\frac{\delta G (q)}{\delta Q(\theta)}= g'(q(\theta))$ since we are computing the derivative in the direction of the function $Q$? – Conrado Costa Aug 02 '17 at 09:25
  • @ConradoCosta Yes the first is correct, though you should use either $Q$ or $h$ for consistency. But $DG(q)$ is not a directional derivative, it is analogous to the gradient $\nabla f(x)$. The directional derivative is $DG(q)(h)$, which is analogous to $h\cdot\nabla f(x)$. – user254433 Aug 02 '17 at 09:35
  • I think the notation is not the best: Instead of saying $g'(Q)=:\frac{\delta g(Q)}{\delta Q(\theta)}$ I would write $g'(Q)=:\frac{\delta g(q)}{\delta Q(\theta)}$. Still, many thanks for the help! – Conrado Costa Aug 03 '17 at 13:34
  • @ConradoCosta Happy to help! – user254433 Aug 03 '17 at 21:49