![MathJax Logo](/templates/jsp/_style2/_tandf/pb2/images/math-jax.gif)
Abstract
Considered in this paper is a Cauchy problem governed by an elliptic partial differential equation. In the Cauchy problem, one wants to recover the unknown Neumann and Dirichlet data on a part of the boundary from the measured Neumann and Dirichlet data, usually contaminated with noise, on the remaining part of the boundary. The Cauchy problem is an inverse problem with severe ill-posedness. In this paper, a coupled complex boundary method (CCBM), originally proposed in [Cheng XL, Gong RF, Han W, et al. A novel coupled complex boundary method for solving inverse source problems. Inverse Prob. 2014;30:055002], is applied to solve the Cauchy problem stably. With the CCBM, all the data, including the known and unknown ones on the boundary are used in a complex Robin boundary on the whole boundary. As a result, the Cauchy problem is transferred into a complex Robin boundary problem of finding the unknown data such that the imaginary part of the solution equals zero in the domain. Then the Tikhonov regularization is applied to the resulting new formulation. Some theoretical analysis is performed on the CCBM-based Tikhonov regularization framework. Moreover, through the adjoint technique, a simple solver is proposed to compute the regularized solution. The finite-element method is used for the discretization. Numerical results are given to show the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed method.
1. Introduction
In this paper, we consider the Cauchy problem of recovering the unknown Neumann and Dirichlet data on a part of the boundary from the knowledge of the Cauchy data on the rest of the boundary. This kind of identification problem, also known as data completion [Citation1] has attracted a large amount of attention from mathematicians, physicists and engineers because of its wide applications in physics and engineering such as thermostatics [Citation2] linear elasticity [Citation3] plasma physics [Citation4] mechanical engineering [Citation5] electrocardiography [Citation6] and corrosion non-destructive evaluation,[Citation7] etc.
Let (
: space dimension) be an open bounded set with Lipschitz boundary
, which is split into two measurable subsets:
with
. In applications,
and
are known as the accessible and inaccessible parts of the boundary for the object of interest, respectively. Denote by n the unit outward normal to
. We consider the following Cauchy problem governed by the steady-state heat equation.
Problem 1.1:
Given in
, and Cauchy data
on
, find
on
such that the following relations hold:
(1)
(1)
The Cauchy problem governed by Helmholtz-type equations are studied in [Citation8–Citation15]. We refer to [Citation16–Citation18] and references therein for analysis of the Cauchy problem governed by other equations and for systemic discussions about the Cauchy problems.
It is well known that Problem 1.1 is ill-posed [Citation19]. Hadamard [Citation20] presented an example to illustrate the ill-posedness of the Cauchy problem for the Laplace equation (). A rigorous proof of the ill-posedness was given in [Citation21] for a general domain. Moreover, after reformulating the Cauchy problem as a variational equation, Ben Belgacem showed in [Citation19] that the Cauchy problem is exponentially ill-posed for both smooth and non-smooth domains. Lavrent’ev demonstrated in [Citation22] that the solution of the Cauchy problem for the Laplace equation is stable given a supplementary condition. Payne [Citation23] generalized the work of [Citation22] and deduced a pointwise bound for the problem in n-dimensions. Some Carleman estimates of the Cauchy problem for the Laplace equation were established in [Citation24,Citation25]. We also refer to [Citation26] for an overview on the stability of the Cauchy problem for general elliptic equations under rather weak assumptions on the problem domain.
Due to the severe ill-posedness of the Cauchy problem, a regularization strategy is needed to obtain a stable approximate solution, especially when the measured data are polluted inevitably by the random noise. In the literature, the Tikhonov regularization [Citation2,Citation27–Citation29] and quasi-reversibility method [Citation25,Citation30–Citation32] are two of the most frequently used approaches for this purpose. Other methods include iterative regularization [Citation33–Citation37] Lavrentiev regularization [Citation38–Citation40] truncation regularization method [Citation41–Citation43] discretization method [Citation44,Citation45] moment problem method [Citation46–Citation49] and perturbation regularization method [Citation43,Citation50,Citation51]. The Cauchy problem for a 3D elliptic equation solved on real data obtained from the physical experiments can be found in [Citation52,Citation53]. Among these methods, a commonly used technique is to convert Problem 1.1 to the following minimization problem with a Kohn–Vogelius-type functional
[Citation1,Citation54]:
(2)
(2)
with
where are the weak solutions of the following mixed boundary value problems (BVPs):
(3)
(3)
and(4)
(4)
respectively. Unlike conventional objective functionals (see [Citation44,Citation55,Citation56] for example), the Kohn–Vogelius functional transfers the data needed to fit into the ones in
, and is generally expected to lead to more robust optimization procedures [Citation57]. A Tikhonov regularization framework is obtained if a regularization term is added to
of the problem (Equation2
(2)
(2) ).
Recently, Cheng et al. [Citation58] proposed a coupled complex boundary method (CCBM) for an inverse source problem, where a complex Robin boundary condition is used to treat simultaneously both Dirichlet and Neumann conditions. As is shown in [Citation58], the CCBM makes inverse source problems more robust and more efficient in computations. In this paper, a CCBM-based Tikhonov regularization framework is proposed for solving Problem 1.1. With our method, similar to problem (Equation2(2)
(2) ), the data needed to fit is transferred from
to
, and the missing data
on
and the state u in
can be reconstructed simultaneously. All boundary conditions, including known and unknown ones, are used as parts of a Robin boundary condition on the whole boundary
. Thus no Dirichlet BVP needs to be solved and this makes the numerical solution of the forward problem easier. Moreover, in the methods where (Equation3
(3)
(3) )–(Equation4
(4)
(4) ) are used, the Dirichlet data T and t need to have the regularity
or
for
. In applications, T is polluted by random noise and it is not appropriate to assume
. In our method, we only need
and
. This avoids the use of the fractional-order Sobolev functions. With the help of adjoint equation, the solution of the regularized reconstruction framework can be computed through a system of BVPs; thus, no iteration is needed and the computation is effective.
We introduce some notation. For a set G (e.g. ,
,
or
), we denote by
the standard Sobolev space with the norm
. Let
. In particular,
represents
with the corresponding inner product
and norm
. Let
be the complex version of
with the inner product
and norm
defined as follows:
,
,
. In addition to the symbols V,
,
, denote
,
,
,
, and
. In the following, c denotes a constant which may have a different value at a different place.
The structure of the paper is as follows. Applying CCBM, we present in Section 2 a reformulation of Problem 1.1. In Section 3, we apply the Tikhonov regularization to the resulting formulation. The well-posedness result of the new regularization framework and a limiting behaviour of the regularized solution when both the noise level and the regularization parameters go to zero are also stated in Section 3. With an adjoint equation, a simple solver of the regularized optimization problem and its finite-element discretization are given in Section 4. Several numerical examples are presented in Section 5 to demonstrate the feasibility and efficiency of the proposed method. Finally, concluding remarks are given in Section 6.
2. A reformulation of the Cauchy problem
Let and
be Lipschitz continuous so that the unit outward normal vector on the boundary is defined a.e. Assume
,
a.e. in
for some positive constant
.
Consider a complex BVP:(5)
(5)
where is the imaginary unit. Obviously, if
satisfy (Equation1
(1)
(1) ), then (Equation5
(5)
(5) ) holds. Conversely, let
satisfy (Equation5
(5)
(5) ), with
,
being the real and imaginary parts of u. Then the real-valued functions
satisfy
(6)
(6)
and(7)
(7)
respectively. If , then
and
on
. Consequently, from BVPs (Equation6
(6)
(6) )–(Equation7
(7)
(7) ), we know that
satisfy (Equation1
(1)
(1) ).
Based on the above discussion, we can reformulate Problem 1.1 as follows.
Problem 2.1:
Given in
,
on
, find
on
such that
where is the imaginary part of the solution
of the BVP (Equation5
(5)
(5) ).
Remark 1:
Note that is required for the equivalence of Problems 1.1 and 2.1. In the case where these regularity assumptions are not satisfied, the reformulation above provides a way of an approximate resolution of Problem 1.1. With the new reformulation, the data needed to fit are transferred from the boundary
to the interior
. Moreover, compared with the existing work, all the data on the boundary here are used in a unified way of a Robin boundary condition.
Define(8)
(8)
(9)
(9)
Then the weak form of the BVP (Equation5(5)
(5) ) is
(10)
(10)
In this work, Tikhonov regularization will be applied to Problem 2.1 to recover the missing Neumann and Dirichlet data on the inaccessible boundary
. We first show a well-posedness result about the forward BVP (Equation5
(5)
(5) ) in the following.
Proposition 2.2:
Given ,
,
, the problem (Equation10
(10)
(10) ) admits a unique solution
which depends continuously on all data. Moreover,
(11)
(11)
Proof:
For any , by applying the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality and the trace inequality, we have the continuity of
and
:
(12)
(12)
(13)
(13)
Moreover, it is not difficult to conclude that(14)
(14)
Therefore, applying the complex version of Lax–Milgram Lemma [Citation59, p.368–369], we conclude that the problem (Equation10(10)
(10) ) admits a unique solution
.
The bound (Equation18(18)
(18) ) follows directly from (Equation10
(10)
(10) ), (Equation13
(13)
(13) ) and (Equation14
(14)
(14) ).
3. Tikhonov regularization and theoretical analysis
In this section, based on the reformulation, Problem 2.1, we propose a Tikhonov regularization framework for the Cauchy problem with the noisy Cauchy data. Let the Cauchy data contain random noise with a known level
, denoted as
. Then the forward BVP (Equation5
(5)
(5) ) is modified to
(15)
(15)
with
Similarly, define(16)
(16)
The weak form of the BVP (Equation15(15)
(15) ) is
(17)
(17)
Like Proposition 2.2, we have the well-posedness results on the problem (Equation17(17)
(17) ).
Proposition 3.1:
Given ,
,
, the problem (Equation17
(17)
(17) ) admits a unique solution
which depends continuously on all data. Moreover, we have
(18)
(18)
Denote by the solutions of the problems (Equation10
(10)
(10) ) and (Equation17
(17)
(17) ). Then it is easy to get
(19)
(19)
For any , write
for the solution of (Equation17
(17)
(17) ). Define an objective functional
(20)
(20)
and introduce the following Tikhonov regularization framework for Problem 2.1.
Problem 3.2:
Find such that
Remark 2:
Alternatively, we may consider a different but related Tikhonov regularization framework by replacing in (Equation20
(20)
(20) ) with the objective functional
We can verify that for any ,
Hence, for ,
is strictly convex.
About Problem 3.2, we first give the following well-posedness result and the first-order optimization condition.
Proposition 3.3:
For any , Problem 3.2 has a unique solution
which depends continuously on all data. Moreover,
is characterized by
(21)
(21)
where and
are the real and imaginary parts of the weak solution
of the adjoint BVP:
(22)
(22)
and is the imaginary part of the solution of the problem (Equation17
(17)
(17) ), with
being replaced by
.
Proof:
For ,
is strictly convex over
. Thus, the well-posedness of Problem 3.2 follows from a standard result on convex minimization problems.[Citation60,Citation61] Moreover, the solution
is characterized by
(23)
(23)
With arguments similar to those in the proofs of [Citation58, Proposition 3.1], we have
Therefore,(24)
(24)
Substitute (Equation24(24)
(24) ) into (Equation23
(23)
(23) ) and take
to get (Equation21
(21)
(21) ).
Next we explore a limiting behaviour of as
. For this purpose, assume the exact Cauchy data
are compatible. Then according to [Citation62], Problem 1.1 admits a solution
. Moreover, from [Citation59], the solution is unique. For a sequence of noise levels
which converges to 0 in
as
, let
be chosen satisfying
and
, as
. Denote by
the solution of Problem 3.2 with
and
replaced by
and
respectively, and assume additionally that
belongs to
. Then the following result holds:
Proposition 3.4:
The solution sequence converges to
in
as
.
Proof:
For simplicity in exposition, set ,
,
and
. Moreover, denote by
for the solution of (Equation17
(17)
(17) ). Recall that
is the unique solution of Problem 1.1. Then, it is also the unique solution of Problem 1.1 due to the equivalence of the two problems, and thus
in
, where
is the imaginary part of the solution of the problem (Equation10
(10)
(10) ) with
replaced by
. Therefore, from the definition of
and using (Equation19
(19)
(19) ), we have
(25)
(25)
implying(26)
(26)
Moreover, from (Equation18(18)
(18) ), there holds
(27)
(27)
Therefore, combining (Equation26(26)
(26) ) and (Equation27
(27)
(27) ), for n large enough,
is uniformly bounded with respect to n in
, and there is a subsequence
of the sequence
, and some elements
,
such that as
,
(28)
(28)
It is not difficult to verify that . In fact, from the definition of
, we have
(29)
(29)
Let in (Equation29
(29)
(29) ), and use convergence relations (Equation28
(28)
(28) ) to get
(30)
(30)
i.e. . Moreover, as
,
(31)
(31)
where we use the uniform boundedness of and the fact that
as
.
From (Equation25(25)
(25) ), there holds
(32)
(32)
Combine (Equation31(31)
(31) ) and (Equation32
(32)
(32) ) to get
which shows that is a solution of Problem 2.1. Since
is the unique solution of Problem 2.1, we conclude that
. Thus the limit does not depend on the subsequence selected, and then the entire solution sequence
in
as
.
Finally, using (Equation26(26)
(26) ) and the weak convergence, we have
as . This shows the strong convergence.
Note that if rather than
, we can prove that
in
as
, with arguments similar to those above, with a slight modification.
4. An algorithm for the regularized optimal problem
As ,
are linear spaces, we obtain linear system for the solution of the optimization Problem 3.2. Indeed, by Proposition 3.3, substitute (Equation21
(21)
(21) ) back into (Equation17
(17)
(17) ) to give
(33)
(33)
The weak form of (Equation22(22)
(22) ) reads:
(34)
(34)
Then by combining (Equation21(21)
(21) ), (Equation33
(33)
(33) ) and (Equation34
(34)
(34) ), we give the following solver of Problem 3.2:
(1) | Solve | ||||
(2) | Compute |
Then a finite-element discretization of (Equation35(35)
(35) ) and (Equation36
(36)
(36) ) reads:
(1) | Solve | ||||
(2) | Compute |
Then it is easy to verify that
with
where is the imaginary part of the solution
of
For fixed , we can prove
in
as
. We omit the detailed argument of this convergence result here.
5. Numerical results
In this section, we present some numerical results to illustrate the feasibility and effectiveness of the CCBM-based Tikhonov regularization for solving the Cauchy problem. Denote by the true Neumann and Dirichlet data we want to recover on
, and by
the approximation of
computed from (Equation37
(37)
(37) ) and (Equation38
(38)
(38) ). Note that (Equation37
(37)
(37) ) reduces to a linear system
, which can be solved by the biconjugate gradient method. To better assess the solution accuracy, we define the
-norm relative errors in the solutions
and
, and the one in the corresponding state
in (Equation37
(37)
(37) ) as follows:
where , corresponding to
, is the true state in (Equation1
(1)
(1) ).
For comparison of the present work with the existing ones, we consider the examples from [Citation1]. Specifically, in the following experiments, let be a ring with inner radius
and external radius
. Assume the Cauchy data
on the external circle
is computed from a true state
given in advance. Then we recover the data
on the inner circle
from the Cauchy data
. All experiments are implemented on a mesh with 1416 nodes, 2592 elements and mesh size
. To be concise, we omit all figures about the solution
in
except noting that in all experiments below, the accuracy in
is better than that in
and
.
Example 1:
We first consider an analytic example. Specifically, set and
in
, and let
. Then
,
,
and
.
For , (Equation37
(37)
(37) ) and (Equation38
(38)
(38) ) are applied to compute approximate solutions
of
from the Cauchy data
. We plot
in Figure . Observe that the results are quite satisfactory.
To verify the stability of the reconstruction model explored here, a uniformly distributed noise with a noise level and 0.20, respectively, is added to
of Test 1 to get
:
where rand(x) returns a pseudo-random value drawn from a uniform distribution on [0, 1]. The experiments are repeated on the same mesh for . The errors in the solutions are listed in Table . We conclude from Table that Problem 3.2 is stable.
Table 1. The dependence of the errors on (Example 1).
Example 2:
In the second example, let ,
and . Then
This model arises in applications of orthotropic materials.
Relations (Equation37(37)
(37) ) and (Equation38
(38)
(38) ) are applied again to obtain approximations of
from
. We show in Figures and the Neumann data
and Dirichlet data
with
, 0.05, 0.1 and 0.5. The regularization parameters for the four reconstructions are
,
,
and
, respectively. We can see from Figures and the results are satisfactory even for small parameter
. The solution accuracy improves when
gets closer to 1. For clarity, the dependence of the errors in
and
on
is plotted in Figure .
Fixing , a uniformly distributed noise with
and 0.20, respectively, is added to
to get noisy Cauchy data
. The experiments are repeated with
, and the errors in the solutions are reported in Table . Table shows again that Problem 3.2 is stable. During our experiments, we found that when
is near 1, the results are rather stable even for big
like 0.2; when
is far away from 1, the results are still stable for not too big
like
.
Table 2. The dependence of the errors on (Example 2).
Example 3:
In the last example, we intend to recover the singular data on . Specifically, let a point source
be placed at
which is near the unaccessible or accessible boundary and assume
Re
, with
,
,
. Then
For simplicity of statements, let . For
, 0.5, 1.1 and 1.3, (Equation37
(37)
(37) ) and (Equation38
(38)
(38) ) are used to recover
from
. The regularization parameters corresponding to four
are
,
,
and
respectively. We show in Figures and the Neumann data
and the Dirichlet data
respectively. The results are still reasonable when the data on the boundary are singular, and the solution accuracy improves when the singularity reduces. For clarity, the dependence of the relative errors in
on the value of
is shown in Figure , which shows that the results get better as the source moves away from
.
To verify the stability, we fix and add uniformly distributed noise with
, 0.10 and 0.20 to
and T, The experiments are performed repeatedly. The regularization parameters corresponding to the four different
are
,
,
and
, respectively. The errors in the solutions are listed in Table . Again, the results are stable. Moreover, like the behaviour of the parameter
in Example 2, the position
of the point source
affect the stability of the solutions. Specifically, the results are rather stable even for big
when
is far way from the boundary
of
; when
is near to
, the results are still stable for not too big
,
for instance.
Table 3. The dependence of the errors on (Example 3).
We note that in all experiments above, because the true solution is known, all optimal regularization parameters are chosen approximately by sweeping them from
. When
is not available, many methods such as discrepancy principle (DP), L-curve rule, quasi-optimality, monotone error rule, generalized cross-validation (GCV), etc., can be used for proper selection of
. For example, using the Morozov DP, Example 1 is tested again and we get similar convergence results. We refer to [Citation63,Citation64] for some further comments on these methods for the choice of the regularization parameters.
6. Conclusions
A CCBM-based Tikhonov regularization framework is presented for solving the Cauchy problem on a general domain. With the proposed method, the data needed to fit the boundary is transferred to the inner of the domain, and the missing data on the unaccessible boundary as well as the corresponding solution in the inner can be reconstructed simultaneously. Since all boundary conditions are used as parts of a Robin boundary condition, no Dirichlet BVP needs to be solved. This makes the resolution of the forward problem easier. Particularly, this allows us to recover both and t in
. Moreover, through a complex adjoint equation, a simple solver is given to derive the solution of the regularized optimal problem. Thus no iteration is needed and the resolution is fast. In conclusion, as shown by the theories and numerical experiments, the method explored in this paper is feasible, effective and stable, for both smooth and non-smooth solutions. We comment that the method discussed in this paper can be applied directly to the Cauchy problem governed by other types of partial differential equations.
Acknowledgements
We thank the three anonymous referees for their careful review of our manuscript and for their constructive comments.
Additional information
Funding
Notes
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
References
- Andrieux S, Nouri-Baranger T, Ben Abda A. Solving Cauchy problems by minimizing an energy-like functional. Inverse Prob. 2006;22:115–133.
- Andrieux S, Ben Abda A, Nouri-Baranger T. Data completion via an energy error functional. C.R. Méc. 2005;333:171–177.
- Andrieux S, Nouri-Baranger T. An energy error-based method for the resolution of the Cauchy problem in 3D linear elasticity. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 2008;197:902–920.
- Blum J. Numerical simulation and optimal control in plasma physics with application to Tokamaks. Chichester: Wiley; 1989.
- Bourgeois L. Contrôle optimal et problèmes inverse en plasticité [Optimal control and Inverse Problems in Plasticity]. Thèse de Docotorat Ecole Polytechnique: Paris; 1998.
- Colli Franzone P, Guerri L, Taccardi B, et al. The direct and inverse potential problems in electrocardiology. Laboratoire d’analyse num\’{e}rique de Pavie: Pavie; 1979. ( Report number 222).
- Inglese G. An inverse problem in corrosion detection. Inverse Prob. 1997;13:977–994.
- Fu CL, Feng XL, Qian Z. Fourier regularization method for solving the Cauchy problem for the Helmholtz equation. Appl. Numer. Math. 2009;59:2625–2640.
- Marin L, Elliott L, Heggs PJ, et al. An alternating iterative algorithm for the Cauchy problem associated to the Helmholtz equation. Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 2003;192:709–722.
- Marin L, Elliott L, Heggs PJ, et al. Conjugate gradient-boundary element solution to the Cauchy problem for Helmholtz-type equations. Comput. Mech. 2003;31:367–377.
- Marin L, Elliott L, Heggs PJ, et al. BEM solution for the Cauchy problem associated with Helmholtz-type equations by the Landweber method. Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem. 2004;28:1025–1034.
- Marin L. A meshless method for the numerical solution of the Cauchy problem associated with three-dimensional Helmholtz-type equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 2005;165:355–374.
- Reginska T, Reginski K. Approximate solution of a Cauchy problem for the Helmholtz equation. Inverse Prob. 2006;22:975–989.
- Reginska T, Wakulicz A. Wavelet moment method for the Cauchy problem for the Helmholtz equation. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2009;223:218–229.
- Wei T, Qin HH, Shi R. Numerical solution of an inverse 2d Cauchy problem connected with the Helmholtz equation. Inverse Prob. 2008;24:035003.
- Lavrent’ev MM. Some improperly posed problems of mathematical physics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1967.
- Lavrent’ev MM, Romanov VG, Shishatskiǐ SP. Ill-posed problems of mathematical physics and analysis. American Mathematical Society: Providence; 1986.
- Tikhonov AN, Arsenin VY. Solution of ill-posed problems. Washington (DC): Winstion and Sons; 1977.
- Ben Belgacem F. Why is the Cauchy problem severely ill-posed? Inverse Prob. 2007;23:823–836.
- Hadamard J. Lectures on Cauchy’s problem in linear partial differential equation. New York (NY): Dover; 1953.
- Ben Belgacem F, El Fekih H. On Cauchy’s problem: I. A variational Steklov--Poincare theory. Inverse Prob. 2005;21:1915–1936.
- Lavrent’ev MM. On the Cauchy problem for the Laplace equation. Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ser. Matem. 1956;20:819–842.
- Payne LE. Bounds in the Cauchy problem for the Laplace equation. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 1960;5:35–45.
- Klibanov MV. Carleman estimates for the regularization of ill-posed Cauchy problems. Appl. Numer. Math. 2015;94:46–74.
- Cao H, Klibanov MV, Pereverzev SV. A Carleman estimate and the balancing principle in the quasi-reversibility method for solving the Cauchy problem for the Laplace equation. Inverse Prob. 2009;25:035005.
- Alessandrini G, Rondi L, Rosset E, et al. The stability for the Cauchy problem for elliptic equations. Inverse Prob. 2009;25:123004.
- Azaïez M, Ben Belgacem F, El Fekih H. On Cauchy’s problem: II. Completion, regularization and approximation. Inverse Prob. 2005;22:1307–1336.
- Berntsson F, Eldén L. Numerical solution of a Cauchy problem for the Laplace equation. Inverse Prob. 2001;17:839–853.
- Cimetière A, Delvare F, Jaoua M, et al. Solution of the Cauchy problem using iterated Tikhonov regularization. Inverse Prob. 2001;17:553–570.
- Bourgeois L. A mixed formulation of quasi-reversibility to solve the Cauchy problem for Laplace’s equation. Inverse Prob. 2005;21:1087–1104.
- Bourgeois L, Dardé J. A duality-based method of quasi-reversibility to solve the Cauchy problem in the presence of noise data. Inverse Prob. 2010;26:095016.
- Klibanov MV, Santosa F. A computational quasi-reversibility method for Cauchy problems for Laplaces equation. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 1991;51:1653–1675.
- Helsing J, Johansson BT. Fast reconstruction of harmonic functions from Cauchy data using integral equation techniques. Inverse Prob. Sci. Eng. 2010;18:381–399.
- Jourhmane M, Nachaoui A. An alternating method for an inverse Cauchy problem. Numer. Algorithms. 1999;21:247–260.
- Kozlov VA, Maz’ya VG, Fomin AV. An iterative method for solving the Cauchy problem for elliptic equations. Comput. Maths. Math. Phys. 1991;31:45–52.
- Leitão A. An iterative method for solving elliptic Cauchy problems. Numer. Funct. Anal. Opt. 2000;21:715–742.
- Lesnic D, Elliot L, Ingham DB. An alternating boundary element method for solving numerically the Cauchy problems for the Laplace equation. Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem. 1997;20:123–133.
- Ben Belgacem F, Du DT, Jelassi F. Extended-domain-Lavrentiev’s regularization of the data completion problem. Inverse Prob. 2011;27:045005.
- Ben Belgacem F, El Fekih H, Jelassi F. The Lavrentiev regularization of the data completion problem. Inverse Prob. 2008;24:045009.
- Liu C-S. An analytical method for the inverse Cauchy problem of Laplace equation in a rectangular plate. J. Mech. 2011;27:575–584.
- Fu CL, Li HF, Qian Z, et al. Fourier regularization method for solving a Cauchy problem for the Laplace equation. Inverse Prob. Sci. Eng. 2008;16:159–169.
- Liu C-S. A modified collocation Trefftz method for the inverse cauchy problem of Laplace equation. Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem. 2008;32:778–785.
- Qian Z, Fu CL, Li ZP. Two regularization methods for a Cauchy problem for the Laplace equation. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2008;338:479–489.
- Chakib A, Nachaoui A. Convergence analysis for finite element approximation to an inverse Cauchy problem. Inverse Prob. 2006;22:1191–1206.
- Xiong XT, Fu CL. Central difference regularization method for the Cauchy problem of Laplace’s equation. Appl. Math. Comput. 2006;181:675–684.
- Ben Abda A, Belaid LJ, Sakat A. Data recovering problem using moments theory and applications to some inverse problems. Int. J. Tomogr. Stat. 2011;17:1–16.
- Belaid LJ, Ben Abda A, Malki NA. The Cauchy problem for the Laplace equation and application to image inpainting. ISRN Math. Anal. 2011;2011: Articl ID 150979.
- Cheng J, Hon YC, Wei T, et al. Numerical computation of a Cauchy problem for Laplace’s equation. Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 2001;81:665–674.
- Hon YC, Wei T. Backus--Gilbert algorithm for the Cauchy problem of the Laplace equation. Inverse Prob. 2001;17:261–271.
- Qian Z, Fu CL, Xiong XT. Fourth-order modified method for the Cauchy problem for the Laplace equation. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2006;192:205–218.
- Zhang H. Modified quasi-boundary value method for Cauchy problems of elliptic equation with variable coefficients. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 2011;106:1–10.
- Karchevsky AL. Reformulation of an inverse problem statement that reduces computational costs. Eurasian J. Math. Comput. Appl. 2013;1:5–20.
- Karchevsky AL, Marchukb IV, Kabovb OA. Calculation of the heat flux near the liquid--gas--solid contact line. Appl. Math. Model. 2015. doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2015.06.018.
- Rischette R, Baranger T, Debit N. Numerical analysis of an energy-like minimization method to solve Cauchy problem with noise data. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2011;235:3257–3269.
- Han W, Huang J, Kazmi K, et al. A numerical method for a Cauchy problem for elliptic partial differential equations. Inverse Prob. 2007;23:2401–2415.
- Kabanikhin SI, Karchevsky AL. Optimizational method for solving the Cauchy problem for an elliptic equation. J. Inverse Ill-Posed Prob. 1995;3:21–46.
- Afraites L, Dambrine M, Kateb D. Conformal mappings and shape derivatives for the transmission problem with a single measurement. Numer. Func. Anal. Opt. 2007;28:519–551.
- Cheng XL, Gong RF, Han W, et al. A novel coupled complex boundary method for solving inverse source problems. Inverse Prob. 2014;30:055002.
- Dautray R, Lions JL. Mathematical analysis and numerical methods for science and technology. Vol. 2. Berlin: Springer; 1988.
- Atkinson K, Han W. Theoretical numerical analysis: a functional analysis framework. 3rd ed. New York (NY): Springer-Verlag; 2009.
- Glashoff K, Gustafson SA. Linear optimization and approximation: an introduction to the theoretical analysis and numerical treatment of semi-infinite programs. New York (NY): Springer-Verlag; 1983.
- Isakov V. Inverse problems for partial differential equations. New York (NY): Springer-verlag; 1998.
- Hämarik U, Palm R, Raus T. A family of rules for parameter choice in Tikhonov regularization of ill-posed problems with inexact noise level. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2012;236:2146–2157.
- Hansen PC. Analysis of discrete ill-posed problems by means of the L-curve. SIAM Rev. 1992;34:561–580.