## Communications in Applied Mathematics and Computational Science

### A comparison of high-order explicit Runge–Kutta, extrapolation, and deferred correction methods in serial and parallel

#### Abstract

We compare the three main types of high-order one-step initial value solvers: extrapolation, spectral deferred correction, and embedded Runge–Kutta pairs. We consider orders four through twelve, including both serial and parallel implementations. We cast extrapolation and deferred correction methods as fixed-order Runge–Kutta methods, providing a natural framework for the comparison. The stability and accuracy properties of the methods are analyzed by theoretical measures, and these are compared with the results of numerical tests. In serial, the eighth-order pair of Prince and Dormand (DOP8) is most efficient. But other high-order methods can be more efficient than DOP8 when implemented in parallel. This is demonstrated by comparing a parallelized version of the well-known ODEX code with the (serial) DOP853 code. For an $N$-body problem with $N=400$, the experimental extrapolation code is as fast as the tuned Runge–Kutta pair at loose tolerances, and is up to two times as fast at tight tolerances.

#### Article information

Source
Commun. Appl. Math. Comput. Sci., Volume 9, Number 2 (2014), 175-200.

Dates
Revised: 4 May 2014
Accepted: 8 May 2014
First available in Project Euclid: 20 December 2017

https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.camcos/1513732119

Digital Object Identifier
doi:10.2140/camcos.2014.9.175

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)
MR3326136

Zentralblatt MATH identifier
1314.65102

Subjects
Primary: 65L06: Multistep, Runge-Kutta and extrapolation methods
Secondary: 65Y05: Parallel computation

#### Citation

Ketcheson, David; bin Waheed, Umair. A comparison of high-order explicit Runge–Kutta, extrapolation, and deferred correction methods in serial and parallel. Commun. Appl. Math. Comput. Sci. 9 (2014), no. 2, 175--200. doi:10.2140/camcos.2014.9.175. https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.camcos/1513732119

#### References

• P. Bogacki and L. F. Shampine, An efficient Runge–Kutta $(4,5)$ pair, Comput. Math. Appl. 32 (1996), no. 6, 15–28.
• K. Burrage, Parallel and sequential methods for ordinary differential equations, The Clarendon Press, New York, NY, 1995.
• J. C. Butcher, Numerical methods for ordinary differential equations, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, 2008.
• M. Calvo, J. I. Montijano, and L. Rández, A new embedded pair of Runge–Kutta formulas of orders $5$ and $6$, Comput. Math. Appl. 20 (1990), no. 1, 15–24.
• A. J. Christlieb, C. B. Macdonald, and B. W. Ong, Parallel high-order integrators, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 32 (2010), no. 2, 818–835.
• A. R. Curtis, High-order explicit Runge–Kutta formulae, their uses, and limitations, J. Inst. Math. Appl. 16 (1975), no. 1, 35–55.
• J. W. Daniel, V. Pereyra, and L. L. Schumaker, Iterated deferred corrections for initial value problems, Acta Ci. Venezolana 19 (1968), 128–135.
• P. Deuflhard, Order and stepsize control in extrapolation methods, Numer. Math. 41 (1983), no. 3, 399–422.
• ––––, Recent progress in extrapolation methods for ordinary differential equations, SIAM Rev. 27 (1985), no. 4, 505–535.
• A. Dutt, L. Greengard, and V. Rokhlin, Spectral deferred correction methods for ordinary differential equations, BIT 40 (2000), no. 2, 241–266.
• M. Emmett and M. L. Minion, Toward an efficient parallel in time method for partial differential equations, Commun. Appl. Math. Comput. Sci. 7 (2012), no. 1, 105–132.
• T. Feagin, High-order explicit Runge–Kutta methods using $m$-symmetry, Neural Parallel Sci. Comput. 20 (2012), no. 3-4, 437–458.
• S. Gottlieb, D. I. Ketcheson, and C.-W. Shu, High order strong stability preserving time discretizations, J. Sci. Comput. 38 (2009), no. 3, 251–289.
• D. Guibert and D. Tromeur-Dervout, Cyclic distribution of pipelined parallel deferred correction method for ODE/DAE, Parallel Computational Fluid Dynamics 2007, Springer, 2009, pp. 171–178.
• B. Gustafsson and W. Kress, Deferred correction methods for initial value problems, BIT 41 (2001), no. 5, suppl., 986–995.
• E. Hairer, S. P. Nørsett, and G. Wanner, Solving ordinary differential equations, I: Nonstiff problems, 2nd ed., Springer Series in Computational Mathematics, no. 8, Springer, Berlin, 1993.
• M. E. Hosea and L. F. Shampine, Efficiency comparisons of methods for integrating ODEs, Comput. Math. Appl. 28 (1994), no. 6, 45–55.
• T. E. Hull, W. H. Enright, B. M. Fellen, and A. E. Sedgwick, Comparing numerical methods for ordinary differential equations, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 9 (1972), 603–637; errata, ibid. 11, 681.
• T. Ito and T. Fukushima, Parallelized extrapolation method and its application to the orbital dynamics, Astron. J. 114 (1997), 1260.
• K. R. Jackson and S. P. Nørsett, The potential for parallelism in Runge–Kutta methods, I: RK formulas in standard form, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 32 (1995), no. 1, 49–82.
• M. Kappeller, M. Kiehl, M. Perzl, and M. Lenke, Optimized extrapolation methods for parallel solution of IVPs on different computer architectures, Appl. Math. Comput. 77 (1996), no. 2-3, 301–315.
• C. A. Kennedy, M. H. Carpenter, and R. M. Lewis, Low-storage, explicit Runge–Kutta schemes for the compressible Navier–Stokes equations, Appl. Numer. Math. 35 (2000), no. 3, 177–219.
• D. I. Ketcheson and R. J. LeVeque, Shock dynamics in layered periodic media, Commun. Math. Sci. 10 (2012), no. 3, 859–874.
• D. I. Ketcheson, L. Lóczi, and M. Parsani, Internal error propagation in explicit Runge–Kutta discretization of PDEs, preprint, 2013.
• D. I. Ketcheson, M. Parsani, and R. J. LeVeque, High-order wave propagation algorithms for hyperbolic systems, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 35 (2013), no. 1, A351–A377.
• Y. Liu, C. W. Shu, and M. Zhang, Strong stability preserving property of the deferred correction time discretization, J. Comput. Math. 26 (2008), no. 5, 633–656.
• L. Lustman, B. Neta, and W. Gragg, Solution of ordinary differential initial value problems on an intel hypercube, Comput. Math. Appl. 23 (1992), no. 10, 65–72.
• M. L. Minion, A hybrid parareal spectral deferred corrections method, Commun. Appl. Math. Comput. Sci. 5 (2010), no. 2, 265–301.
• H. Ono, On the 25 stage 12th order explicit Runge–Kutta method, Trans. Japan Soc. Ind. Appl. Math. 16 (2006), no. 3, 177, In Japanese.
• P. J. Prince and J. R. Dormand, High order embedded Runge–Kutta formulae, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 7 (1981), no. 1, 67–75.
• T. Rauber and G. Rünger, Load balancing schemes for extrapolation methods, Concurrency: Practice and Experience 9 (1997), no. 3, 181–202.
• L. F. Shampine and L. S. Baca, Fixed versus variable order Runge–Kutta, ACM Trans. Math. Software 12 (1986), no. 1, 1–23.
• H. H. Simonsen, Extrapolation methods for ODE's: continuous approximations, a parallel approach, Ph.D. thesis, University of Trondheim, Norway, 1990.
• R. Speck, D. Ruprecht, R. Krause, M. Emmett, M. Minion, M. Winkel, and P. Gibbon, A massively space-time parallel N-body solver, Proceedings of the International Conference on High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis (Los Alamitos, CA), IEEE Computer Society Press, 2012, pp. 92:1–92:11.
• P. J. van der Houwen and B. P. Sommeijer, Parallel iteration of high-order Runge–Kutta methods with stepsize control, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 29 (1990), no. 1, 111–127.
• P. J. van der Houwen and B. P. Sommeijer, Parallel ODE solvers, ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News 18 (1990), no. 3, 71–81.
• Y. Xia, Y. Xu, and C.-W. Shu, Efficient time discretization for local discontinuous Galerkin methods, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. B 8 (2007), no. 3, 677–693.