Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 37 references

The unified theory of shifted convolution quadrature for fractional calculus

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A shifted convolution quadrature converges to order p exactly when it is stable and consistent to order p, provided the generating function satisfies a mild zero-free condition.

desk verdict A useful shifted-CQ framework undercut by erroneous superconvergence claims that need correcting before publication. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.01136 v3 pith:4FQJCOJJ submitted 2019-08-03 math.NA cs.NA

Yang Liu , Baoli Yin , Hong Li , Zhimin Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.NAcs.NA MSC 26A3365D3065L2065M1265M60
keywords shiftedconvolutionquadratureRiemann-LiouvillefractionalcalculusgeneratingfunctionsstabilityregionssuperconvergenceGronwallinequalitytime-fractionaldiffusionequationnumericalconvergencetheory
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Shifted convolution quadrature approximates the Riemann-Liouville fractional integral $I^\alpha f$ at a shifted node $x_{n-\theta}$ by a weighted history sum plus starting corrections. This paper's central aim is to give such shifted schemes the same kind of complete theory that classical convolution quadrature has: a scheme is convergent of order $p$ if and only if it is stable and consistent of order $p$, with consistency read from the generating function through $h^\alpha e^{\theta h}\omega(e^{-h})=1+O(h^p)$. If true, this unification matters because it brings many existing second-order schemes that evaluate fractional integrals at half-integer or otherwise shifted nodes under one framework, so results on starting weights, correction, superconvergence, and stability regions transfer to all of them at once. The paper also uses the theory to design new generating functions and to analyze a second-order scheme for the time-fractional diffusion equation.

What carries the argument

The central object is the generating function $\omega(\xi)=\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}\omega_j\xi^j$ for the convolution weights; all three properties in the main theorem are conditions on it. Stability is a bound on the coefficients, consistency is the behavior of $h^\alpha e^{\theta h}\omega(e^{-h})$ as $h\to0$, and Condition-$\omega$ asks that $\omega$ be analytic and zero-free in the open unit disk, with boundary exponents no larger than $\Re\alpha$. The argument is carried by two identities stated in the paper without proof: the convolution-error identity $E_h^{\alpha}(f*g)=(E_h^{\alpha}f)*g$ and the homogeneity identity $(E_h^{\alpha}t^{\beta-1})(x)=x^{\alpha+\beta-1}(E_{h/x}^{\alpha}t^{\beta-1})(1)$. For constructing schemes, the key expansion is $\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\gamma_i(1-\xi)^i=\xi^{\theta}(-\ln\xi/(1-\xi))^{-\alpha}$, whose truncated versions define the shift-generalized Newton-Gregory formulas.

What would settle it

Compute both sides of the homogeneity identity $(E_h^{\alpha}t^{\beta-1})(x)=x^{\alpha+\beta-1}(E_{h/x}^{\alpha}t^{\beta-1})(1)$ for, say, $\alpha=1/2$, $\theta=1/4$, $\beta=3/2$, using the second-order shift-generalized Newton-Gregory weights; a single value of $x/h$ where the two sides differ would show the proof of Theorem 2.8 does not transfer. The commutativity identity $E_h^{\alpha}(f*g)=(E_h^{\alpha}f)*g$ can be tested similarly on $f(t)=t^{\beta-1}$ and $g(t)=t^{\gamma-1}$ for small $\beta,\gamma$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is Theorem 2.8: a shifted convolution quadrature whose convolution weights are generated by $\omega(\xi)$ and satisfy Condition-$\omega$ converges to $I^\alpha$ at order $p$ exactly when it is stable and consistent of order $p$. Stability is the coefficient bound $\omega_n=O(n^{\alpha-1})$; consistency is the shifted condition $h^\alpha e^{\theta h}\omega(e^{-h})=1+O(h^p)$; convergence is tested on the power functions $t^{\beta-1}$ for $\beta$ outside $\{0,-1,-2,\dots\}$. The proof works by generalizing the two classical consistency lemmas to the shifted setting, and it leans on two algebraic properties of the convolution error, equations (2.4) and (2.5), which let the error commute with convolution and rescale with $h$. Alongside the equivalence, the paper proves that any classical convolution-quadrature generating function can be shifted to order $p$ by multiplying by a truncated series for $\xi^{\theta}$, and it introduces the shift-generalized Newton-Gregory family whose coefficients are fixed by $\xi^{\theta}(-\ln\xi/(1-\xi))^{-\alpha}$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the shifted convolution error obeys the two identities (2.4)-(2.5), commuting with convolution and rescaling with $h$ exactly as the classical error does, with the paper only saying these are directly checked and giving no proof.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every classical convolution-quadrature generating function, including fractional BDF-$p$, the fractional trapezoidal rule, and the fractional BN-$\theta$ method, can be converted into a shifted generating function of the same order by multiplying with a truncated expansion of $\xi^{\theta}$ (Theorem 2.11).
  • The starting-weight correction technique from classical convolution quadrature survives the shift: for functions with the mild boundary singularity $x^{\beta-1}g(x)$, suitable starting weights restore the full order $p$ uniformly on intervals bounded away from zero (Theorem 2.9).
  • The shift parameter controls absolute stability: for the same base rule, different $\theta$ values can give $A(\pi/2)$-stability, conditional stability, or no stable real interval at all, so the theory turns $\theta$ into a design parameter.
  • The second-order shift-generalized Newton-Gregory scheme applied to the time-fractional diffusion equation satisfies the discrete fractional Grönwall inequality for a range of $\theta$, yielding stability and an optimal $(\tau^2 + h^{r+1})$ error estimate.
  • The superconvergence seen in existing shifted schemes, such as taking $\theta=-\alpha/2$, is explained as a special choice of $\theta$ that raises the consistency order of a generating function that would otherwise be lower order.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The two unproved identities (2.4)-(2.5) are the natural place to probe the theory's boundary: if they fail for some nonzero $\theta$, the equivalence theorem would still hold for many practical schemes, but its proof would need a different route; a direct symbolic check on specific power functions would map where that boundary lies.
  • The consistency condition suggests a systematic superconvergence search: since the leading error is read off from $h^\alpha e^{\theta h}\omega(e^{-h})$, one can tune $\theta$ to cancel one error term at a time, potentially producing shifted schemes of arbitrarily high order from low-order base rules without adding more coefficients.
  • The strong dependence of stability regions on $\theta$ opens an optimization problem the paper touches only indirectly: among all SCQ schemes of a fixed order, which shift parameter and generating-function structure maximize the sector of stability while keeping the convolution weights nonnegative enough for Grönwall-type arguments?
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a 'shifted convolution quadrature' (SCQ) framework for approximating the Riemann-Liouville fractional integral I^α at shifted nodes x_{n-θ}. The main theoretical result, Theorem 2.8, states that under a condition-ω, a SCQ is convergent of order p if and only if it is stable and consistent of order p, with consistency defined by h^α e^{θh}ω(e^{-h}) = 1 + O(h^p). The authors derive a transformation theorem from classical CQ generating functions, introduce shift-generalized Newton-Gregory formulas, and present several examples (shifted Grünwald, WSGL, generalized BDF2-θ) including claimed new third-order superconvergence schemes. Section 3 studies stability regions as a function of θ, and Section 4 applies a second-order shift-generalized Newton-Gregory formula to a time-fractional diffusion equation with finite elements, deriving stability and error estimates and reporting numerical tests.

Significance. If Theorem 2.8 and the examples are correct, the framework would unify many existing shifted schemes under one theory and explain superconvergence as a choice of θ. The paper is explicit and constructive: it gives concrete generating functions, stability-region descriptions, and numerical verification, which are strengths. However, the advertised superconvergence points in Examples 2 and 4 are algebraically wrong as stated, and the central equivalence theorem relies on unproved identities and omitted lemma details. The general framework is likely salvageable, but the current version overclaims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2, Theorem 2.8 and Eqs. (2.4)-(2.5)] The proof of the main equivalence theorem is not self-contained. The identities (2.4) and (2.5) are load-bearing: they are used to pass from consistency to convergence in the usual Lubich argument, but the text only says their correctness 'can be directly checked' and gives no derivation. Lemma 2.5 and Lemma 2.6, which are the shifted analogues of Lubich's lemmas, are both stated with proofs omitted ('the rest argument ... is omitted here' and 'almost the same as Lemma 3.2 in [1]'). Please give complete proofs of (2.4)-(2.5) and of the two lemmas in the shifted setting, or explicitly identify which steps of Lubich's proof fail to transfer.
  2. [Section 2, Example 2, Eqs. (2.37)-(2.38)] The advertised order-3 superconvergence point is incorrect. For ω(ξ)=(1-ξ)^{-α}[1-(α/2+θ)(1-ξ)], a direct expansion gives h^α e^{θh}ω(e^{-h}) = 1 + [α(5-3α)/24 + θ(1-α)/2 - θ^2/2]h^2 + O(h^3). The h^2 coefficient vanishes for θ = ((1-α) ± sqrt(1-α/3))/2, not for θ = 1 - α/2 - (1/2)sqrt(1-α/3) as stated in (2.38). For α=0, (2.38) gives θ=1/2, but the expansion is 1+h^2/8+O(h^4), so only order 2; for α=1, (2.38) gives θ≈0.0918, while the required values are ±1/sqrt(6)≈±0.408. Thus the claim that the scheme (2.37) is consistently of order 3 at the stated θ is false.
  3. [Section 2, Example 4, Eqs. (2.43)-(2.45)] The order-3 claim for the two-term WSGL-type generating function inherits the algebraic defect of Example 2: for m=1, (2.45) reduces to (2.38), which is not the correct root of the consistency condition computed above. The statement that the coefficients in (2.44) 'can be easily checked' to give stability and consistency of order 3 is not accompanied by the check, and the special case m=1 shows the stated formula does not have the claimed order. Please correct the condition or withdraw the superconvergence claim, and include the actual consistency expansion for general m.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2, Eq. (2.36)] The two displayed formulas are both marked with convergence orders, but the subsequent discussion of superconvergence switches to the two-term formula (2.37), which is not the same as the second formula in (2.36); please clarify what is being claimed.
  2. [Section 2, Eq. (2.38)] The sentence 'One can check that this choice of θ satisfies the condition-ω' should be replaced by an explicit verification, especially because the corrected consistency condition has two roots and the stability and condition-ω requirements may select only one of them.
  3. [Section 3, Theorem 3.4] The proof is omitted with a reference to Lubich's Theorem 2.1; since the dependence of the stability region on θ is a stated contribution, include at least a brief derivation of the two boundary sets in (3.12).
  4. [Section 4, Lemma 4.2] The proof asserts that Θ_n is increasing and that the limit exists, but gives no argument for either statement; please complete the proof or state the missing estimates so that the bound (4.13) follows.
  5. [Section 4, Table 5] In the rows for α=0.5, θ=0.1 without the starting part, the reported rates jump from 2.4993 to -0.9761 as τ is refined; the text should comment on this non-monotone behavior, since it may otherwise cast doubt on the convergence claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the SCQ equivalence theorem is an independent generalization of Lubich's CQ theory, and the new schemes are constructed by direct consistency checks rather than fitted to the conclusions.

full rationale

The central claim, Theorem 2.8, states an equivalence between convergence and stability plus consistency for shifted convolution quadrature. This is a standard equivalence theorem, not a circular definition: convergence (Definition 2.3) is stated in terms of the convolution error operator E_h^α, while consistency (Definition 2.2) is a separate algebraic condition on h^α e^{θh} ω(e^{-h}). The proof route through Lemmas 2.5 and 2.6 follows Lubich's classical CQ argument, with the shifted exponential factor e^{θh} inserted explicitly. Identities (2.4) and (2.5) are asserted as directly checkable auxiliary properties of the convolution error; they are not the same as the convergence conclusion, though the paper does omit their proofs and Theorem 2.8 is therefore not fully self-contained. The example methods, including the shift-generalized Newton-Gregory formula and the WSGL variants, are constructed by choosing coefficients so that the consistency condition (2.7) holds term-by-term and then verifying stability from ω_n = O(n^{α-1}); this is a construction satisfying the theorem's hypotheses, not a prediction fitted to measured output. Self-citations such as [8], [22], and [37] are used as credits for existing schemes or companion work and are not load-bearing for Theorem 2.8, Theorem 2.11, or the Gronwall-based PDE analysis, which relies on the external inequality [13]. The paper also benchmarks the temporal and spatial rates numerically against a manufactured exact solution, so the reported convergence rates are not forced by a fitted parameter. The possible algebraic defect in the advertised superconvergence point (2.38) is a correctness or superconvergence-claim issue, not a circularity in the derivation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central theorem relies on Lubich's standard CQ theory and on the unproved convolution identity (2.4). The shift parameter theta is a user-chosen design variable. No physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • Shift parameter theta = varies per scheme; e.g., theta in [0, alpha/2] in Sec. 4.3, theta=1-alpha/2-0.5*sqrt(1-alpha/3) in Eq. (2.38)
    theta is a hand-chosen design variable that determines the evaluation node x_{n-theta}. The paper explores allowed ranges and uses specific values in experiments; it is not fitted to data but is a free parameter of the SCQ framework.
assumptions (3)
  • standard math Lubich's CQ equivalence theorem and its lemmas hold and extend unchanged to the shifted setting; proofs of Lemmas 2.5 and 2.6 are 'almost the same' as [1].
    Theorem 2.8's proof is built directly on [1] and the omitted lemmas; correctness depends on that extension.
  • domain assumption The convolution error identity E_h^alpha(f*g) = (E_h^alpha f)*g and homogeneity (2.5) hold for the shifted quadrature defined in (2.3).
    Stated with 'correctness can be directly checked' but proof omitted; these properties feed Theorem 2.8 and the equivalence of convergence definitions.
  • domain assumption Condition-omega in (2.16): the generating function omega(xi) is analytic without zeros in the unit disk and Re(alpha_j) <= Re(alpha).
    This condition is imposed to guarantee stability and is used throughout the construction of SCQ generating functions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The unified theory of shifted convolution quadrature for fractional calculus." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4FQJCOJJ

@misc{pith2026190801136,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The unified theory of shifted convolution quadrature for fractional calculus},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4FQJCOJJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.01136}
}
abstract

The convolution quadrature theory is a systematic approach to analyse the approximation of the Riemann-Liouville fractional operator $I^{\alpha}$ at node $x_{n}$. In this paper, we develop the shifted convolution quadrature ($SCQ$) theory which generalizes the theory of convolution quadrature by introducing a shifted parameter $\theta$ to cover as many numerical schemes that approximate the operator $I^{\alpha}$ with an integer convergence rate as possible. The constraint on the parameter $\theta$ is discussed in detail and the phenomenon of superconvergence for some schemes is examined from a new perspective. For some technique purposes when analysing the stability or convergence estimates of a method applied to PDEs, we design some novel formulas with desired properties under the framework of the $SCQ$. Finally, we conduct some numerical tests with nonsmooth solutions to further confirm our theory.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.01136 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. h = 0.2, λ = −15. the series P∞ l=0 ηl is bounded with Λ, i.e., P∞ l=0 ηl < Λ, and that the time step size satisfies τ ≤ 1 α p 2πAΓ(2 − α)Λ . (4.15) Then for any nonnegative sequence {v k} N k=0 such that Xn k=1 An−k [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Lubich, Discretized fractional calculus, SIAM J

    C. Lubich, Discretized fractional calculus, SIAM J. Mat h. Anal., 1986, 17(3): 704-719

    work page 1986

  2. [2]

    Lubich, A stability analysis of convolution quadratu rea for Abel-Volterra integral equations, IMA J

    C. Lubich, A stability analysis of convolution quadratu rea for Abel-Volterra integral equations, IMA J. Numer. Anal., 1986, 6(1): 87-101

    work page 1986

  3. [3]

    Dahlquist, Convergence and stability in the numerica l integration of ordinary differential equations, Math

    G. Dahlquist, Convergence and stability in the numerica l integration of ordinary differential equations, Math. Scand., 1956, 33-53

    work page 1956

  4. [4]

    Dimitrov, Numerical approximations for fractional d ifferential equations, Journal of Fractional Cal- culus and Applications, 2015, 5(3S)(22): 1-45

    Y. Dimitrov, Numerical approximations for fractional d ifferential equations, Journal of Fractional Cal- culus and Applications, 2015, 5(3S)(22): 1-45

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    Gao, H.W

    G.H. Gao, H.W. Sun, Z.Z. Sun, Stability and convergence o f finite difference schemes for a class of time-fractional sub-diffusion equations based on certain s uperconvergence, J. Comput. Phys., 2015, 280: 510-528

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    W.Y. Tian, H. Zhou, W.H. Deng, A class of second order diffe rence approximations for solving space fractional diffusion equations, Math. Comput., 2015, 84: 17 03-1727

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Zeng, Z.Q

    F.H. Zeng, Z.Q. Zhang, G.E. Karniadakis, Second-order n umerical methods for multi-term fractional differential equations: smooth and non-smooth solutions, C omputer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2017, 327: 478-502

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Liu, Y.W

    Y. Liu, Y.W. Du, H. Li, F.W. Liu, Y.J. Wang, Some second-or der θ schemes combined with fi- nite element method for nonlinear fractional Cable equatio n, Numer. Algor., 2019, 80(2): 533-555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11075-018-0496-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s11075-018-0496-0 2019

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    J.C. Li, Y.Q. Huang, Y.P. Lin, Developing finite element m ethods for Maxwell’s equations in a Cole-Cole dispersive medium, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 2011, 33(6): 3153- 3174

    2011

  2. [10]

    Baffet, J.S

    D. Baffet, J.S. Hesthaven, High-order accurate local sc hemes for fractional differential equations, J. Sci. Comput., 2017, 70(1): 355-385

    2017

  3. [11]

    Ding, C.P

    H.F. Ding, C.P. Li, Q. Yi, A new second-order midpoint ap proximation formula for Riemann-Liouville derivative: algorithm and its application, IMA J. Appl. Mat h., 2017, 82(5): 909-944

    2017

  4. [12]

    I. Podlubny, Fractional differential equations: an int roduction to fractional derivatives, fractional differ- ential equations, to methods of their solution and some of th eir applications, Elsevier, 1998

    1998

  5. [13]

    H.L. Liao, W. McLean, J.W. Zhang, A discrete Gr¨ onwall i nequality with applications to numerical schemes for subdiffusion problems, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 201 9, 57(1): 218-237

  6. [14]

    Zeng, C.P

    F.H. Zeng, C.P. Li, F.W. Liu, I. Turner, The use of finite d ifference /element approaches for solving the time-fractional subdiffusion equation, SIAM J. Sci. Comput ., 2013, 35(6): A2976-A3000. 20

    2013

  7. [15]

    Z.B. Wang, S. Vong, Compact difference schemes for the mo dified anomalous fractional sub-diffusion equation and the fractional diffusion-wave equation, J. Com put. Phys., 2014, 277: 1-15

    2014

  8. [16]

    M. M. Meerschaert, C. Tadjeran, Finite difference appro ximations for fractional advection-dispersion flow equations, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 2004, 172(1): 65-77

    2004

  9. [17]

    Tadjeran, M

    C. Tadjeran, M. M. Meerschaert, H. P. Scheffer, A second- order accurate numerical approximation for the fractional diffusion equation, J. Comput. Phys., 2006, 2 13: 205-213

    2006

  10. [18]

    Gunarathna, H.M

    W.A. Gunarathna, H.M. Nasir, W.B. Daundasekera, An exp licit form for higher order approximations of fractional derivatives, Appl. Numer. Math., 2019

    2019

  11. [19]

    Y.W. Du, Y. Liu, H. Li, Z.C. Fang, S. He, Local discontinu ous Galerkin method for a nonlinear time- fractional fourth-order partial differential equation, J. Comput. Phys., 2017, 344: 108-126

    2017

  12. [20]

    Liu, Y.W

    Y. Liu, Y.W. Du, H. Li, J.F. Wang, A two-grid finite elemen t approximation for a nonlinear time- fractional Cable equation, Nonlinear Dyn., 2016, 85: 2535- 2548

    2016

  13. [21]

    H. Chen, F. Holland, M. Stynes, An analysis of the Gr¨ unw ald-Letnikov scheme for initial-value problems with weakly singular solutions, Appl. Numer. Math., 2019, 1 39: 52-61

    2019

  14. [22]

    B.L. Yin, Y. Liu, H. Li, Z.M. Zhang, Two families of novel second-order fractional numerical formulas and their applications to fractional differential equation s, arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.01242, 2019

    1906 arXiv

  15. [23]

    B.L. Yin, Y. Liu, H. Li, Z.M. Zhang, Finite element metho ds based on two families of novel second-order numerical formulas for the fractional Cable model, 2019

    2019

  16. [24]

    Jin, B.Y

    B.T. Jin, B.Y. Li, Z. Zhou, Correction of high-order BDF convolution quadrature for fractional evolution equations, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 2017, 39(6): A3129-A3152

    2017

  17. [25]

    Ford, Y.B

    N. Ford, Y.B. Yan, An approach to construct higher order time discretisation schemes for time fractional partial differential equations with nonsmooth data, Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal., 2017, 20(5): 1076-1105

    2017

  18. [26]

    Yang, General Fractional Derivatives: Theory, Me thods and Applications, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2019

    X.J. Yang, General Fractional Derivatives: Theory, Me thods and Applications, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2019

    2019

  19. [27]

    Dehghan, M

    M. Dehghan, M. Abbaszadeh, W. Deng, Fourth-order numer ical method for the space-time tempered fractional diffusion-wave equation, Appl. Math. Lett., 201 7, 73: 120-127

  20. [28]

    Feng, F.W

    L.B. Feng, F.W. Liu, I. Turner, Q.Q. Yang, P.H. Zhuang, U nstructured mesh finite difference/finite element method for the 2D time-space Riesz fractional diffus ion equation on irregular convex domains, Appl. Math. Model., 2018, 59: 441-463

    2018

  21. [29]

    Baleanu, K

    D. Baleanu, K. Diethelm, E. Scalas and J.J. Trujillo, Fr actional Calculus: Models and Numerical Meth- ods, 3 of Series on Complexity, Nonlinearity and Chaos,Worl d Scientific Publishing, New York, NY.USA, 2012

    2012

  22. [30]

    Zhao, A.J

    M. Zhao, A.J. Cheng, H. Wang, A preconditioned fast Herm ite finite element method for space-fractional diffusion equations, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. B, 201 7, 22(9): 3529-3545

  23. [31]

    C.P. Li, F.H. Zeng, Numerical methods for fractional ca lculus, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2015

    2015

  24. [32]

    C.P. Li, M. Cai, High-order approximation to Caputo der ivatives and Caputo-type advection-diffusion equations: revisited, Numer. Func. Anal. Opt., 2017, 38(7) : 861-890

    2017

  25. [33]

    X.J. Yang, F. Gao, H.M. Srivastava, A new computational approach for solving nonlinear local fractional PDEs, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 2018, 339: 285-296

    2018

  26. [34]

    Y. Liu, M. Zhang, H. Li, J.C. Li, High-order local discon tinuous Galerkin method combined with WSGD- approximation for a fractional subdiffusion equation, Comp ut. Math. Appl., 2017, 73(6), 1298-1314

    2017

  27. [35]

    C.C. Ji, Z.Z. Sun, A high-order compact finite difference scheme for the fractional sub-diffusion equation, J. Sci. Comput., 2015, 64(3): 959-985

    2015

  28. [36]

    Chen, W.H

    M.H. Chen, W.H. Deng, Fourth order difference approxima tions for space Riemann-Liouville derivatives based on weighted and shifted Lubich difference operators, C ommun. Comput. Phys., 2014, 16(2): 516- 540

    2014

  29. [37]

    B.L. Yin, Y. Liu, H. Li, S. He, Fast algorithm based on TT- M FE system for space fractional Allen-Cahn equations with smooth and non-smooth solutions, J. Comput. Phys., 2019, 379: 351-372. 21

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.