Artifact 88ace9cc14b866316fa62c8f08097afea6c5ab013b1165079a44e5bd9a7d4af1:
- File
r36/doc/APPLYSYM.TEX
— part of check-in
[152fb3bdbb]
at
2011-10-17 17:58:33
on branch master
— svn:eol-style, svn:executable and line endings for files
in historical/r36 treegit-svn-id: https://svn.code.sf.net/p/reduce-algebra/code/trunk/historical@1480 2bfe0521-f11c-4a00-b80e-6202646ff360 (user: schoepf@users.sourceforge.net, size: 53621) [annotate] [blame] [check-ins using] [more...]
% This is a LaTeX file \documentstyle[12pt]{article} %Sets size of page and margins \oddsidemargin 10mm \evensidemargin 10mm \topmargin 0pt \headheight 0pt \headsep 0pt \footheight 14pt \footskip 40pt \textheight 23cm \textwidth 15cm %\textheight 15cm \textwidth 10cm %spaces lines at one and a half spacing %\def\baselinestretch{1.5} %\parskip = \baselineskip %Defines capital R for the reals, ... %\font\Edth=msym10 %\def\Integer{\hbox{\Edth Z}} %\def\Rational{\hbox{\Edth Q}} %\def\Real{\hbox{\Edth R}} %\def\Complex{\hbox{\Edth C}} \title{Programs for Applying Symmetries of PDEs} \author{Thomas Wolf \\ School of Mathematical Sciences \\ Queen Mary and Westfield College \\ University of London \\ London E1 4NS \\ T.Wolf@maths.qmw.ac.uk } \begin{document} \maketitle \begin{abstract} In this paper the programs {\tt APPLYSYM}, {\tt QUASILINPDE} and {\tt DETRAFO} are described which aim at the utilization of infinitesimal symmetries of differential equations. The purpose of {\tt QUASILINPDE} is the general solution of quasilinear PDEs. This procedure is used by {\tt APPLYSYM} for the application of point symmetries for either \begin{itemize} \item calculating similarity variables to perform a point transformation which lowers the order of an ODE or effectively reduces the number of explicitly occuring independent variables in a PDE(-system) or for \item generalizing given special solutions of ODEs/PDEs with new constant parameters. \end{itemize} The program {\tt DETRAFO} performs arbitrary point- and contact transformations of ODEs/PDEs and is applied if similarity and symmetry variables have been found. The program {\tt APPLYSYM} is used in connection with the program {\tt LIEPDE} for formulating and solving the conditions for point- and contact symmetries which is described in \cite{LIEPDE}. The actual problem solving is done in all these programs through a call to the package {\tt CRACK} for solving overdetermined PDE-systems. \end{abstract} \tableofcontents %------------------------------------------------------------------------- \section{Introduction and overview of the symmetry method} The investigation of infinitesimal symmetries of differential equations (DEs) with computer algebra programs attrackted considerable attention over the last years. Corresponding programs are available in all major computer algebra systems. In a review article by W.\ Hereman \cite{WHer} about 200 references are given, many of them describing related software. One reason for the popularity of the symmetry method is the fact that Sophus Lie's method \cite{lie1},\cite{lie2} is the most widely used method for computing exact solutions of non-linear DEs. Another reason is that the first step in this method, the formulation of the determining equation for the generators of the symmetries, can already be very cumbersome, especially in the case of PDEs of higher order and/or in case of many dependent and independent variables. Also, the formulation of the conditions is a straight forward task involving only differentiations and basic algebra - an ideal task for computer algebra systems. Less straight forward is the automatic solution of the symmetry conditions which is the strength of the program {\tt LIEPDE} (for a comparison with another program see \cite{LIEPDE}). The novelty described in this paper are programs aiming at the final third step: Applying symmetries for \begin{itemize} \item calculating similarity variables to perform a point transformation which lowers the order of an ODE or effectively reduces the number of explicitly occuring independent variables of a PDE(-system) or for \item generalizing given special solutions of ODEs/PDEs with new constant parameters. \end{itemize} Programs which run on their own but also allow interactive user control are indispensible for these calculations. On one hand the calculations can become quite lengthy, like variable transformations of PDEs (of higher order, with many variables). On the other hand the freedom of choosing the right linear combination of symmetries and choosing the optimal new symmetry- and similarity variables makes it necessary to `play' with the problem interactively. The focus in this paper is directed on questions of implementation and efficiency, no principally new mathematics is presented. In the following subsections a review of the first two steps of the symmetry method is given as well as the third, i.e.\ the application step is outlined. Each of the remaining sections is devoted to one procedure. %--------------------------------------- \subsection{The first step: Formulating the symmetry conditions} To obey classical Lie-symmetries, differential equations \begin{equation} H_A = 0 \label{PDEs} \end{equation} for unknown functions $y^\alpha,\;\;1\leq \alpha \leq p$ of independent variables $x^i,\;\;1\leq i \leq q$ must be forminvariant against infinitesimal transformations \begin{equation} \tilde{x}^i = x^i + \varepsilon \xi^i, \;\; \;\;\; \tilde{y}^\alpha = y^\alpha + \varepsilon \eta^\alpha \label{tran} \end{equation} in first order of $\varepsilon.$ To transform the equations (\ref{PDEs}) by (\ref{tran}), derivatives of $y^\alpha$ must be transformed, i.e. the part linear in $\varepsilon$ must be determined. The corresponding formulas are (see e.g. \cite{Olv}, \cite{Step}) \begin{eqnarray} \tilde{y}^\alpha_{j_1\ldots j_k} & = & y^\alpha_{j_1\ldots j_k} + \varepsilon \eta^\alpha_{j_1\ldots j_k} + O(\varepsilon^2) \nonumber \\ \vspace{3mm} \eta^\alpha_{j_1\ldots j_{k-1}j_k} & = & \frac{D \eta^\alpha_{j_1\ldots j_{k-1}}}{D x^k} - y^\alpha_{ij_1\ldots j_{k-1}}\frac{D \xi^i}{D x^k} \label{recur} \end{eqnarray} where $D/Dx^k$ means total differentiation w.r.t.\ $x^k$ and from now on lower latin indices of functions $y^\alpha,$ (and later $u^\alpha$) denote partial differentiation w.r.t.\ the independent variables $x^i,$ (and later $v^i$). The complete symmetry condition then takes the form \begin{eqnarray} X H_A & = & 0 \;\; \; \; \mbox{mod} \; \; \; H_A = 0\ \label{sbed1} \\ X & = & \xi^i \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} + \eta^\alpha \frac{\partial}{\partial y^\alpha} + \eta^\alpha_m \frac{\partial}{\partial y^\alpha_m} + \eta^\alpha_{mn} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^\alpha_{mn}} + \ldots + \eta^\alpha_{mn\ldots p} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^\alpha_{mn\ldots p}}. \label{sbed2} \end{eqnarray} where mod $H_A = 0$ means that the original PDE-system is used to replace some partial derivatives of $y^\alpha$ to reduce the number of independent variables, because the symmetry condition (\ref{sbed1}) must be fulfilled identically in $x^i, y^\alpha$ and all partial derivatives of $y^\alpha.$ For point symmetries, $\xi^i, \eta^\alpha$ are functions of $x^j, y^\beta$ and for contact symmetries they depend on $x^j, y^\beta$ and $y^\beta_k.$ We restrict ourself to point symmetries as those are the only ones that can be applied by the current version of the program {\tt APPLYSYM} (see below). For literature about generalized symmetries see \cite{WHer}. Though the formulation of the symmetry conditions (\ref{sbed1}), (\ref{sbed2}), (\ref{recur}) is straightforward and handled in principle by all related programs \cite{WHer}, the computational effort to formulate the conditions (\ref{sbed1}) may cause problems if the number of $x^i$ and $y^\alpha$ is high. This can partially be avoided if at first only a few conditions are formulated and solved such that the remaining ones are much shorter and quicker to formulate. A first step in this direction is to investigate one PDE $H_A = 0$ after another, as done in \cite{Cham}. Two methods to partition the conditions for a single PDE are described by Bocharov/Bronstein \cite{Alex} and Stephani \cite{Step}. In the first method only those terms of the symmetry condition $X H_A = 0$ are calculated which contain at least a derivative of $y^\alpha$ of a minimal order $m.$ Setting coefficients of these $u$-derivatives to zero provides symmetry conditions. Lowering the minimal order $m$ successively then gradually provides all symmetry conditions. The second method is even more selective. If $H_A$ is of order $n$ then only terms of the symmetry condition $X H_A = 0$ are generated which contain $n'$th order derivatives of $y^\alpha.$ Furthermore these derivatives must not occur in $H_A$ itself. They can therefore occur in the symmetry condition (\ref{sbed1}) only in $\eta^\alpha_{j_1\ldots j_n},$ i.e. in the terms \[\eta^\alpha_{j_1\ldots j_n} \frac{\partial H_A}{\partial y^\alpha_{j_1\ldots j_n}}. \] If only coefficients of $n'$th order derivatives of $y^\alpha$ need to be accurate to formulate preliminary conditions then from the total derivatives to be taken in (\ref{recur}) only that part is performed which differentiates w.r.t.\ the highest $y^\alpha$-derivatives. This means, for example, to form only $y^\alpha_{mnk} \partial/\partial y^\alpha_{mn} $ if the expression, which is to be differentiated totally w.r.t.\ $x^k$, contains at most second order derivatives of $y^\alpha.$ The second method is applied in {\tt LIEPDE}. Already the formulation of the remaining conditions is speeded up considerably through this iteration process. These methods can be applied if systems of DEs or single PDEs of at least second order are investigated concerning symmetries. %--------------------------------------- \subsection{The second step: Solving the symmetry conditions} The second step in applying the whole method consists in solving the determining conditions (\ref{sbed1}), (\ref{sbed2}), (\ref{recur}) which are linear homogeneous PDEs for $\xi^i, \eta^\alpha$. The complete solution of this system is not algorithmic any more because the solution of a general linear PDE-system is as difficult as the solution of its non-linear characteristic ODE-system which is not covered by algorithms so far. Still algorithms are used successfully to simplify the PDE-system by calculating its standard normal form and by integrating exact PDEs if they turn up in this simplification process \cite{LIEPDE}. One problem in this respect, for example, concerns the optimization of the symbiosis of both algorithms. By that we mean the ranking of priorities between integrating, adding integrability conditions and doing simplifications by substitutions - all depending on the length of expressions and the overall structure of the PDE-system. Also the extension of the class of PDEs which can be integrated exactly is a problem to be pursuit further. The program {\tt LIEPDE} which formulates the symmetry conditions calls the program {\tt CRACK} to solve them. This is done in a number of successive calls in order to formulate and solve some first order PDEs of the overdetermined system first and use their solution to formulate and solve the next subset of conditions as described in the previous subsection. Also, {\tt LIEPDE} can work on DEs that contain parametric constants and parametric functions. An ansatz for the symmetry generators can be formulated. For more details see \cite{LIEPDE} or \cite{WoBra}. The call of {\tt LIEPDE} is \\ {\tt LIEPDE}(\{{\it de}, {\it fun}, {\it var}\}, \{{\it od}, {\it lp}, {\it fl}\}); \\ where \begin{itemize} \item {\it de} is a single DE or a list of DEs in the form of a vanishing expression or in the form $\ldots=\ldots\;\;$. \item {\it fun} is the single function or the list of functions occuring in {\it de}. \item {\it var} is the single variable or the list of variables in {\it de}. \item {\it od} is the order of the ansatz for $\xi, \eta.$ It is = 0 for point symmetries and = 1 for contact symmetries (accepted by {\tt LIEPDE} only in case of one ODE/PDE for one unknown function). % and $>1$ for dynamical symmetries %(only in case of one ODE for one unknown function) \item If {\it lp} is $nil$ then the standard ansatz for $\xi^i, \eta^\alpha$ is taken which is \begin{itemize} \item for point symmetries ({\it od} =0) is $\xi^i = \xi^i(x^j,y^\beta), \eta^\alpha = \eta^\alpha(x^j,y^\beta)$ \item for contact symmetries ({\it od} =1) is $ \xi^i := \Omega_{u_i}, \;\;\; \eta := u_i\Omega_{u_i} \; - \; \Omega, $ \\ $\Omega:=\Omega(x^i, u, u_j)$ %\item for dynamical symmetries ({\it od}$>1$) \\ % $ \xi := \Omega,_{u'}, \;\;\; % \eta := u'\Omega,_{u'} \; - \; \Omega, \;\;\; % \Omega:=\Omega(x, u, u',\ldots, y^{({\it od}-1)})$ % where {\it od} must be less than the order of the ODE. \end{itemize} If {\it lp} is not $nil$ then {\it lp} is the ansatz for $\xi^i, \eta^\alpha$ and must have the form \begin{itemize} \item for point symmetries {\tt \{xi\_\mbox{$x1$} = ..., ..., eta\_\mbox{$u1$} = ..., ...\}} where {\tt xi\_, eta\_ } are fixed and $x1, \ldots, u1$ are to be replaced by the actual names of the variables and functions. \item otherwise {\tt spot\_ = ...} where the expression on the right hand side is the ansatz for the Symmetry-POTential $\Omega.$ \end{itemize} \item {\it fl} is the list of free functions in the ansatz in case {\it lp} is not $nil.$ \end{itemize} The result of {\tt LIEPDE} is a list with 3 elements, each of which is a list: \[ \{\{{\it con}_1,{\it con}_2,\ldots\}, \{{\tt xi}\__{\ldots}=\ldots, \ldots, {\tt eta}\__{\ldots}=\ldots, \ldots\}, \{{\it flist}\}\}. \] The first list contains remaining unsolved symmetry conditions {\it con}$_i$. It is the empty list \{\} if all conditions have been solved. The second list gives the symmetry generators, i.e.\ expressions for $\xi_i$ and $\eta_j$. The last list contains all free constants and functions occuring in the first and second list. %That the automatic calculation of symmetries run in most practical cases %is shown with the following example. It is insofar difficult, as many %symmetries exist and the solution consequently more difficult is to deriv. % %--------------------------------------- %\subsection{Example} %For the following PDE-system, which takes its simplest form in the %formalism of exterior forms: % %\begin{eqnarray*} %0 & = & 3k_t,_{tt}-2k_t,_{xx}-2k_t,_{yy}-2k_t,_{zz}-k_x,_{tx}-2k_zk_x,_y \\ % & & +2k_yk_x,_z-k_y,_{ty}+2k_zk_y,_x-2k_xk_y,_z-k_z,_{tz}-2k_yk_z,_x+2k_xk_z,_y \\ %0 & = & k_t,_{tx}-2k_zk_t,_y+2k_yk_t,_z+2k_x,_{tt}-3k_x,_{xx}-2k_x,_{yy} \\ % & & -2k_x,_{zz}+2k_zk_y,_t-k_y,_{xy}-2k_tk_y,_z-2k_yk_z,_t-k_z,_{xz}+2k_tk_z,_y \\ %0 & = & k_t,_{ty}+2k_zk_t,_x-2k_xk_t,_z-2k_zk_x,_t-k_x,_{xy}+2k_tk_x,_z \\ % & & +2k_y,_{tt}-2k_y,_{xx}-3k_y,_{yy}-2k_y,_{zz}+2k_xk_z,_t-2k_tk_z,_x-k_z,_{yz} \\ %0 & = & k_t,_{tz}-2k_yk_t,_x+2k_xk_t,_y+2k_yk_x,_t-k_x,_{xz}-2k_tk_x,_y \\ % & & -2k_xk_y,_t+2k_tk_y,_x-k_y,_{yz}+2k_z,_{tt}-2k_z,_{xx}-2k_z,_{yy}-3k_z,_{zz} %\end{eqnarray*} %--------------------------------------- \subsection{The third step: Application of infinitesimal symmetries} If infinitesimal symmetries have been found then the program {\tt APPLYSYM} can use them for the following purposes: \begin{enumerate} \item Calculation of one symmetry variable and further similarity variables. After transforming the DE(-system) to these variables, the symmetry variable will not occur explicitly any more. For ODEs this has the consequence that their order has effectively been reduced. \item Generalization of a special solution by one or more constants of integration. \end{enumerate} Both methods are described in the following section. %------------------------------------------------------------------------- \section{Applying symmetries with {\tt APPLYSYM}} %--------------------------------------- \subsection{The first mode: Calculation of similarity and symmetry variables} In the following we assume that a symmetry generator $X$, given in (\ref{sbed2}), is known such that ODE(s)/PDE(s) $H_A=0$ satisfy the symmetry condition (\ref{sbed1}). The aim is to find new dependent functions $u^\alpha = u^\alpha(x^j,y^\beta)$ and new independent variables $v^i = v^i(x^j,y^\beta),\;\; 1\leq\alpha,\beta\leq p,\;1\leq i,j \leq q$ such that the symmetry generator $X = \xi^i(x^j,y^\beta)\partial_{x^i} + \eta^\alpha(x^j,y^\beta)\partial_{y^\alpha}$ transforms to \begin{equation} X = \partial_{v^1}. \label{sbed3} \end{equation} Inverting the above transformation to $x^i=x^i(v^j,u^\beta), y^\alpha=y^\alpha(v^j,u^\beta)$ and setting $H_A(x^i(v^j,u^\beta), y^\alpha(v^j,u^\beta),\ldots) = h_A(v^j, u^\beta,\ldots)$ this means that \begin{eqnarray*} 0 & = & X H_A(x^i,y^\alpha,y^\beta_j,\ldots)\;\;\; \mbox{mod} \;\;\; H_A=0 \\ & = & X h_A(v^i,u^\alpha,u^\beta_j,\ldots)\;\;\; \mbox{mod} \;\;\; h_A=0 \\ & = & \partial_{v^1}h_A(v^i,u^\alpha,u^\beta_j,\ldots)\;\;\; \mbox{mod} \;\;\; h_A=0. \end{eqnarray*} Consequently, the variable $v^1$ does not occur explicitly in $h_A$. In the case of an ODE(-system) $(v^1=v)$ the new equations $0=h_A(v,u^\alpha,du^\beta/dv,\ldots)$ are then of lower total order after the transformation $z = z(u^1) = du^1/dv$ with now $z, u^2,\ldots u^p$ as unknown functions and $u^1$ as independent variable. The new form (\ref{sbed3}) of $X$ leads directly to conditions for the symmetry variable $v^1$ and the similarity variables $v^i|_{i\neq 1}, u^\alpha$ (all functions of $x^k,y^\gamma$): \begin{eqnarray} X v^1 = 1 & = & \xi^i(x^k,y^\gamma)\partial_{x^i}v^1 + \eta^\alpha(x^k,y^\gamma)\partial_{y^\alpha}v^1 \label{ql1} \\ X v^j|_{j\neq 1} = X u^\beta = 0 & = & \xi^i(x^k,y^\gamma)\partial_{x^i}u^\beta + \eta^\alpha(x^k,y^\gamma)\partial_{y^\alpha}u^\beta \label{ql2} \end{eqnarray} The general solutions of (\ref{ql1}), (\ref{ql2}) involve free functions of $p+q-1$ arguments. From the general solution of equation (\ref{ql2}), $p+q-1$ functionally independent special solutions have to be selected ($v^2,\ldots,v^p$ and $u^1,\ldots,u^q$), whereas from (\ref{ql1}) only one solution $v^1$ is needed. Together, the expressions for the symmetry and similarity variables must define a non-singular transformation $x,y \rightarrow u,v$. Different special solutions selected at this stage will result in different resulting DEs which are equivalent under point transformations but may look quite differently. A transformation that is more difficult than another one will in general only complicate the new DE(s) compared with the simpler transformation. We therefore seek the simplest possible special solutions of (\ref{ql1}), (\ref{ql2}). They also have to be simple because the transformation has to be inverted to solve for the old variables in order to do the transformations. The following steps are performed in the corresponding mode of the program {\tt APPLYSYM}: \begin{itemize} \item The user is asked to specify a symmetry by selecting one symmetry from all the known symmetries or by specifying a linear combination of them. \item Through a call of the procedure {\tt QUASILINPDE} (described in a later section) the two linear first order PDEs (\ref{ql1}), (\ref{ql2}) are investigated and, if possible, solved. \item From the general solution of (\ref{ql1}) 1 special solution is selected and from (\ref{ql2}) $p+q-1$ special solutions are selected which should be as simple as possible. \item The user is asked whether the symmetry variable should be one of the independent variables (as it has been assumed so far) or one of the new functions (then only derivatives of this function and not the function itself turn up in the new DE(s)). \item Through a call of the procedure {\tt DETRAFO} the transformation $x^i,y^\alpha \rightarrow v^j,u^\beta$ of the DE(s) $H_A=0$ is finally done. \item The program returns to the starting menu. \end{itemize} %--------------------------------------- \subsection{The second mode: Generalization of special solutions} A second application of infinitesimal symmetries is the generalization of a known special solution given in implicit form through $0 = F(x^i,y^\alpha)$. If one knows a symmetry variable $v^1$ and similarity variables $v^r, u^\alpha,\;\;2\leq r\leq p$ then $v^1$ can be shifted by a constant $c$ because of $\partial_{v^1}H_A = 0$ and therefore the DEs $0 = H_A(v^r,u^\alpha,u^\beta_j,\ldots)$ are unaffected by the shift. Hence from \[0 = F(x^i, y^\alpha) = F(x^i(v^j,u^\beta), y^\alpha(v^j,u^\beta)) = \bar{F}(v^j,u^\beta)\] follows that \[ 0 = \bar{F}(v^1+c,v^r,u^\beta) = \bar{F}(v^1(x^i,y^\alpha)+c, v^r(x^i,y^\alpha), u^\beta(x^i,y^\alpha))\] defines implicitly a generalized solution $y^\alpha=y^\alpha(x^i,c)$. This generalization works only if $\partial_{v^1}\bar{F} \neq 0$ and if $\bar{F}$ does not already have a constant additive to $v^1$. The method above needs to know $x^i=x^i(u^\beta,v^j),\; y^\alpha=y^\alpha(u^\beta,v^j)$ \underline{and} $u^\alpha = u^\alpha(x^j,y^\beta), v^\alpha = v^\alpha(x^j,y^\beta)$ which may be practically impossible. Better is, to integrate $x^i,y^\alpha$ along $X$: \begin{equation} \frac{d\bar{x}^i}{d\varepsilon} = \xi^i(\bar{x}^j(\varepsilon), \bar{y}^\beta(\varepsilon)), \;\;\;\;\; \frac{d\bar{y}^\alpha}{d\varepsilon} = \eta^\alpha(\bar{x}^j(\varepsilon), \bar{y}^\beta(\varepsilon)) \label{ODEsys} \end{equation} with initial values $\bar{x}^i = x^i, \bar{y}^\alpha = y^\alpha$ for $\varepsilon = 0.$ (This ODE-system is the characteristic system of (\ref{ql2}).) Knowing only the finite transformations \begin{equation} \bar{x}^i = \bar{x}^i(x^j,y^\beta,\varepsilon),\;\; \bar{y}^\alpha = \bar{y}^\alpha(x^j,y^\beta,\varepsilon) \label{ODEsol} \end{equation} gives immediately the inverse transformation $\bar{x}^i = \bar{x}^i(x^j,y^\beta,\varepsilon),\;\; \bar{y}^\alpha = \bar{y}^\alpha(x^j,y^\beta,\varepsilon)$ just by $\varepsilon \rightarrow -\varepsilon$ and renaming $x^i,y^\alpha \leftrightarrow \bar{x}^i,\bar{y}^\alpha.$ The special solution $0 = F(x^i,y^\alpha)$ is generalized by the new constant $\varepsilon$ through \[ 0 = F(x^i,y^\alpha) = F(x^i(\bar{x}^j,\bar{y}^\beta,\varepsilon), y^\alpha(\bar{x}^j,\bar{y}^\beta,\varepsilon)) \] after dropping the $\bar{ }$. The steps performed in the corresponding mode of the program {\tt APPLYSYM} show features of both techniques: \begin{itemize} \item The user is asked to specify a symmetry by selecting one symmetry from all the known symmetries or by specifying a linear combination of them. \item The special solution to be generalized and the name of the new constant have to be put in. \item Through a call of the procedure {\tt QUASILINPDE}, the PDE (\ref{ql1}) is solved which amounts to a solution of its characteristic ODE system (\ref{ODEsys}) where $v^1=\varepsilon$. \item {\tt QUASILINPDE} returns a list of constant expressions \begin{equation} c_i = c_i(x^k, y^\beta, \varepsilon),\;\;1\leq i\leq p+q \end{equation} which are solved for $x^j=x^j(c_i,\varepsilon),\;\; y^\alpha=y^\alpha(c_i,\varepsilon)$ to obtain the generalized solution through \[ 0 = F(x^j, y^\alpha) = F( x^j(c_i(x^k, y^\beta, 0), \varepsilon)), y^\alpha(c_i(x^k, y^\beta, 0), \varepsilon))). \] \item The new solution is availabe for further generalizations w.r.t.\ other symmetries. \end{itemize} If one would like to generalize a given special solution with $m$ new constants because $m$ symmetries are known, then one could run the whole program $m$ times, each time with a different symmetry or one could run the program once with a linear combination of $m$ symmetry generators which again is a symmetry generator. Running the program once adds one constant but we have in addition $m-1$ arbitrary constants in the linear combination of the symmetries, so $m$ new constants are added. Usually one will generalize the solution gradually to make solving (\ref{ODEsys}) gradually more difficult. %--------------------------------------- \subsection{Syntax} The call of {\tt APPLYSYM} is {\tt APPLYSYM}(\{{\it de}, {\it fun}, {\it var}\}, \{{\it sym}, {\it cons}\}); \begin{itemize} \item {\it de} is a single DE or a list of DEs in the form of a vanishing expression or in the form $\ldots=\ldots\;\;$. \item {\it fun} is the single function or the list of functions occuring in {\it de}. \item {\it var} is the single variable or the list of variables in {\it de}. \item {\it sym} is a linear combination of all symmetries, each with a different constant coefficient, in form of a list of the $\xi^i$ and $\eta^\alpha$: \{xi\_\ldots=\ldots,\ldots,eta\_\ldots=\ldots,\ldots\}, where the indices after `xi\_' are the variable names and after `eta\_' the function names. \item {\it cons} is the list of constants in {\it sym}, one constant for each symmetry. \end{itemize} The list that is the first argument of {\tt APPLYSYM} is the same as the first argument of {\tt LIEPDE} and the second argument is the list that {\tt LIEPDE} returns without its first element (the unsolved conditions). An example is given below. What {\tt APPLYSYM} returns depends on the last performed modus. After modus 1 the return is \\ \{\{{\it newde}, {\it newfun}, {\it newvar}\}, {\it trafo}\} \\ where \begin{itemize} \item {\it newde} lists the transformed equation(s) \item {\it newfun} lists the new function name(s) \item {\it newvar} lists the new variable name(s) \item {\it trafo} lists the transformations $x^i=x^i(v^j,u^\beta), y^\alpha=y^\alpha(v^j,u^\beta)$ \end{itemize} After modus 2, {\tt APPLYSYM} returns the generalized special solution. %--------------------------------------- \subsection{Example: A second order ODE} Weyl's class of solutions of Einsteins field equations consists of axialsymmetric time independent metrics of the form \begin{equation} {\rm{d}} s^2 = e^{-2 U} \left[ e^{2 k} \left( \rm{d} \rho^2 + \rm{d} z^2 \right)+\rho^2 \rm{d} \varphi^2 \right] - e^{2 U} \rm{d} t^2, \end{equation} where $U$ and $k$ are functions of $\rho$ and $z$. If one is interested in generalizing these solutions to have a time dependence then the resulting DEs can be transformed such that one longer third order ODE for $U$ results which contains only $\rho$ derivatives \cite{Markus}. Because $U$ appears not alone but only as derivative, a substitution \begin{equation} g = dU/d\rho \label{g1dgl} \end{equation} lowers the order and the introduction of a function \begin{equation} h = \rho g - 1 \label{g2dgl} \end{equation} simplifies the ODE to \begin{equation} 0 = 3\rho^2h\,h'' -5\rho^2\,h'^2+5\rho\,h\,h'-20\rho\,h^3h'-20\,h^4+16\,h^6+4\,h^2. \label{hdgl} \end{equation} where $'= d/d\rho$. Calling {\tt LIEPDE} through \small \begin{verbatim} depend h,r; prob:={{-20*h**4+16*h**6+3*r**2*h*df(h,r,2)+5*r*h*df(h,r) -20*h**3*r*df(h,r)+4*h**2-5*r**2*df(h,r)**2}, {h}, {r}}; sym:=liepde(prob,{0,nil,nil}); end; \end{verbatim} \normalsize gives \small \begin{verbatim} 3 2 sym := {{}, {xi_r= - c10*r - c11*r, eta_h=c10*h*r }, {c10,c11}}. \end{verbatim} \normalsize All conditions have been solved because the first element of {\tt sym} is $\{\}$. The two existing symmetries are therefore \begin{equation} - \rho^3 \partial_{\rho} + h \rho^2 \,\partial_{h} \;\;\;\;\;\;\mbox{and} \;\;\;\;\;\;\rho \partial_{\rho}. \end{equation} Corresponding finite transformations can be calculated with {\tt APPLYSYM} through \small \begin{verbatim} newde:=applysym(de,rest sym); \end{verbatim} \normalsize The interactive session is given below with the user input following the prompt `{\tt Input:3:}' or following `?'. (Empty lines have been deleted.) \small \begin{verbatim} Do you want to find similarity and symmetry variables (enter `1;') or generalize a special solution with new parameters (enter `2;') or exit the program (enter `;') Input:3: 1; \end{verbatim} \normalsize We enter `1;' because we want to reduce dependencies by finding similarity variables and one symmetry variable and then doing the transformation such that the symmetry variable does not explicitly occur in the DE. \small \begin{verbatim} ---------------------- The 1. symmetry is: 3 xi_r= - r 2 eta_h=h*r ---------------------- The 2. symmetry is: xi_r= - r ---------------------- Which single symmetry or linear combination of symmetries do you want to apply? "$ Enter an expression with `sy_(i)' for the i'th symmetry. sy_(1); \end{verbatim} \normalsize We could have entered `sy\_(2);' or a combination of both as well with the calculation running then differently. \small \begin{verbatim} The symmetry to be applied in the following is 3 2 {xi_r= - r ,eta_h=h*r } Enter the name of the new dependent variables: Input:3: u; Enter the name of the new independent variables: Input:3: v; \end{verbatim} \normalsize This was the input part, now the real calculation starts. \small \begin{verbatim} The ODE/PDE (-system) under investigation is : 2 2 2 3 0 = 3*df(h,r,2)*h*r - 5*df(h,r) *r - 20*df(h,r)*h *r 6 4 2 + 5*df(h,r)*h*r + 16*h - 20*h + 4*h for the function(s) : h. It will be looked for a new dependent variable u and an independent variable v such that the transformed de(-system) does not depend on u or v. 1. Determination of the similarity variable 2 The quasilinear PDE: 0 = r *(df(u_,h)*h - df(u_,r)*r). The equivalent characteristic system: 3 0= - df(u_,r)*r 2 0= - r *(df(h,r)*r + h) for the functions: h(r) u_(r). \end{verbatim} \normalsize The PDE is equation (\ref{ql2}). \small \begin{verbatim} The general solution of the PDE is given through 0 = ff(u_,h*r) with arbitrary function ff(..). A suggestion for this function ff provides: 0 = - h*r + u_ Do you like this choice? (Y or N) ?y \end{verbatim} \normalsize For the following calculation only a single special solution of the PDE is necessary and this has to be specified from the general solution by choosing a special function {\tt ff}. (This function is called {\tt ff} to prevent a clash with names of user variables/functions.) In principle any choice of {\tt ff} would work, if it defines a non-singular coordinate transformation, i.e.\ here $r$ must be a function of $u\_$. If we have $q$ independent variables and $p$ functions of them then {\tt ff} has $p+q$ arguments. Because of the condition $0 = ${\tt ff} one has essentially the freedom of choosing a function of $p+q-1$ arguments freely. This freedom is also necessary to select $p+q-1$ different functions {\tt ff} and to find as many functionally independent solutions $u\_$ which all become the new similarity variables. $q$ of them become the new functions $u^\alpha$ and $p-1$ of them the new variables $v^2,\ldots,v^p$. Here we have $p=q=1$ (one single ODE). Though the program could have done that alone, once the general solution {\tt ff(..)} is known, the user can interfere here to enter a simpler solution, if possible. \small \begin{verbatim} 2. Determination of the symmetry variable 2 3 The quasilinear PDE: 0 = df(u_,h)*h*r - df(u_,r)*r - 1. The equivalent characteristic system: 3 0=df(r,u_) + r 2 0=df(h,u_) - h*r for the functions: r(u_) h(u_) . New attempt with a different independent variable The equivalent characteristic system: 2 0=df(u_,h)*h*r - 1 2 0=r *(df(r,h)*h + r) for the functions: r(h) u_(h) . The general solution of the PDE is given through 2 2 2 - 2*h *r *u_ + h 0 = ff(h*r,--------------------) 2 with arbitrary function ff(..). A suggestion for this function ff(..) yields: 2 2 h *( - 2*r *u_ + 1) 0 = --------------------- 2 Do you like this choice? (Y or N) ?y \end{verbatim} \normalsize Similar to above. \small \begin{verbatim} The suggested solution of the algebraic system which will do the transformation is: sqrt(v)*sqrt(2) {h=sqrt(v)*sqrt(2)*u,r=-----------------} 2*v Is the solution ok? (Y or N) ?y In the intended transformation shown above the dependent variable is u and the independent variable is v. The symmetry variable is v, i.e. the transformed expression will be free of v. Is this selection of dependent and independent variables ok? (Y or N) ?n \end{verbatim} \normalsize We so far assumed that the symmetry variable is one of the new variables, but, of course we also could choose it to be one of the new functions. If it is one of the functions then only derivatives of this function occur in the new DE, not the function itself. If it is one of the variables then this variable will not occur explicitly. In our case we prefer (without strong reason) to have the function as symmetry variable. We therefore answered with `no'. As a consequence, $u$ and $v$ will exchange names such that still all new functions have the name $u$ and the new variables have name $v$: \small \begin{verbatim} Please enter a list of substitutions. For example, to make the variable, which is so far call u1, to an independent variable v2 and the variable, which is so far called v2, to an dependent variable u1, enter: `{u1=v2, v2=u1};' Input:3: {u=v,v=u}; The transformed equation which should be free of u: 3 6 2 3 0=3*df(u,v,2)*v - 16*df(u,v) *v - 20*df(u,v) *v + 5*df(u,v) Do you want to find similarity and symmetry variables (enter `1;') or generalize a special solution with new parameters (enter `2;') or exit the program (enter `;') Input:3: ; \end{verbatim} We stop here. The following is returned from our {\tt APPLYSYM} call: \small \begin{verbatim} 3 6 2 3 {{{3*df(u,v,2)*v - 16*df(u,v) *v - 20*df(u,v) *v + 5*df(u,v)}, {u}, {v}}, sqrt(u)*sqrt(2) {r=-----------------, h=sqrt(u)*sqrt(2)*v }} 2*u \end{verbatim} \normalsize The use of {\tt APPLYSYM} effectively provided us the finite transformation \begin{equation} \rho=(2\,u)^{-1/2},\;\;\;\;\;h=(2\,u)^{1/2}\,v \label{trafo1}. \end{equation} and the new ODE \begin{equation} 0 = 3u''v - 16u'^3v^6 - 20u'^2v^3 + 5u' \label{udgl} \end{equation} where $u=u(v)$ and $'=d/dv.$ Using one symmetry we reduced the 2.\,order ODE (\ref{hdgl}) to a first order ODE (\ref{udgl}) for $u'$ plus one integration. The second symmetry can be used to reduce the remaining ODE to an integration too by introducing a variable $w$ through $v^3d/dv = d/dw$, i.e. $w = -1/(2v^2)$. With \begin{equation} p=du/dw \label{udot} \end{equation} the remaining ODE is \[0 = 3\,w\,\frac{dp}{dw} + 2\,p\,(p+1)(4\,p+1) \] with solution \[ \tilde{c}w^{-2}/4 = \tilde{c}v^4 = \frac{p^3(p+1)}{(4\,p+1)^4},\;\;\; \tilde{c}=const. \] Writing (\ref{udot}) as $p = v^3(du/dp)/(dv/dp)$ we get $u$ by integration and with (\ref{trafo1}) further a parametric solution for $\rho,h$: \begin{eqnarray} \rho & = & \left(\frac{3c_1^2(2p-1)}{p^{1/2}(p+1)^{1/2}}+c_2\right)^{-1/2} \\ h & = & \frac{(c_2p^{1/2}(p+1)^{1/2}+6c_1^2p-3c_1^2)^{1/2}p^{1/2}}{c_1(4p+1)} \end{eqnarray} where $c_1, c_2 = const.$ and $c_1=\tilde{c}^{1/4}.$ Finally, the metric function $U(p)$ is obtained as an integral from (\ref{g1dgl}),(\ref{g2dgl}). %--------------------------------------- \subsection{Limitations of {\tt APPLYSYM}} Restrictions of the applicability of the program {\tt APPLYSYM} result from limitations of the program {\tt QUASILINPDE} described in a section below. Essentially this means that symmetry generators may only be polynomially non-linear in $x^i, y^\alpha$. Though even then the solvability can not be guaranteed, the generators of Lie-symmetries are mostly very simple such that the resulting PDE (\ref{PDE}) and the corresponding characteristic ODE-system have good chances to be solvable. Apart from these limitations implied through the solution of differential equations with {\tt CRACK} and algebraic equations with {\tt SOLVE} the program {\tt APPLYSYM} itself is free of restrictions, i.e.\ if once new versions of {\tt CRACK, SOLVE} would be available then {\tt APPLYSYM} would not have to be changed. Currently, whenever a computational step could not be performed the user is informed and has the possibility of entering interactively the solution of the unsolved algebraic system or the unsolved linear PDE. %------------------------------------------------------------------------- \section{Solving quasilinear PDEs} %--------------------------------------- \subsection{The content of {\tt QUASILINPDE}} The generalization of special solutions of DEs as well as the computation of similarity and symmetry variables involve the general solution of single first order linear PDEs. The procedure {\tt QUASILINPDE} is a general procedure aiming at the general solution of PDEs \begin{equation} a_1(w_i,\phi)\phi_{w_1} + a_2(w_i,\phi)\phi_{w_2} + \ldots + a_n(w_i,\phi)\phi_{w_n} = b(w_i,\phi) \label{PDE} \end{equation} in $n$ independent variables $w_i, i=1\ldots n$ for one unknown function $\phi=\phi(w_i)$. \begin{enumerate} \item The first step in solving a quasilinear PDE (\ref{PDE}) is the formulation of the corresponding characteristic ODE-system \begin{eqnarray} \frac{dw_i}{d\varepsilon} & = & a_i(w_j,\phi) \label{char1} \\ \frac{d\phi}{d\varepsilon} & = & b(w_j,\phi) \label{char2} \end{eqnarray} for $\phi, w_i$ regarded now as functions of one variable $\varepsilon$. Because the $a_i$ and $b$ do not depend explicitly on $\varepsilon$, one of the equations (\ref{char1}),(\ref{char2}) with non-vanishing right hand side can be used to divide all others through it and by that having a system with one less ODE to solve. If the equation to divide through is one of (\ref{char1}) then the remaining system would be \begin{eqnarray} \frac{dw_i}{dw_k} & = & \frac{a_i}{a_k} , \;\;\;i=1,2,\ldots k-1,k+1,\ldots n \label{char3} \\ \frac{d\phi}{dw_k} & = & \frac{b}{a_k} \label{char4} \end{eqnarray} with the independent variable $w_k$ instead of $\varepsilon$. If instead we divide through equation (\ref{char2}) then the remaining system would be \begin{eqnarray} \frac{dw_i}{d\phi} & = & \frac{a_i}{b} , \;\;\;i=1,2,\ldots n \label{char3a} \end{eqnarray} with the independent variable $\phi$ instead of $\varepsilon$. The equation to divide through is chosen by a subroutine with a heuristic to find the ``simplest'' non-zero right hand side ($a_k$ or $b$), i.e.\ one which \begin{itemize} \item is constant or \item depends only on one variable or \item is a product of factors, each of which depends only on one variable. \end{itemize} One purpose of this division is to reduce the number of ODEs by one. Secondly, the general solution of (\ref{char1}), (\ref{char2}) involves an additive constant to $\varepsilon$ which is not relevant and would have to be set to zero. By dividing through one ODE we eliminate $\varepsilon$ and lose the problem of identifying this constant in the general solution before we would have to set it to zero. \item % from enumerate To solve the system (\ref{char3}), (\ref{char4}) or (\ref{char3a}), the procedure {\tt CRACK} is called. Although being designed primarily for the solution of overdetermined PDE-systems, {\tt CRACK} can also be used to solve simple not overdetermined ODE-systems. This solution process is not completely algorithmic. Improved versions of {\tt CRACK} could be used, without making any changes of {\tt QUASILINPDE} necessary. If the characteristic ODE-system can not be solved in the form (\ref{char3}), (\ref{char4}) or (\ref{char3a}) then successively all other ODEs of (\ref{char1}), (\ref{char2}) with non-vanishing right hand side are used for division until one is found such that the resulting ODE-system can be solved completely. Otherwise the PDE can not be solved by {\tt QUASILINPDE}. \item % from enumerate If the characteristic ODE-system (\ref{char1}), (\ref{char2}) has been integrated completely and in full generality to the implicit solution \begin{equation} 0 = G_i(\phi, w_j, c_k, \varepsilon),\;\; i,k=1,\ldots,n+1,\;\;j=1,\ldots,n \label{charsol1} \end{equation} then according to the general theory for solving first order PDEs, $\varepsilon$ has to be eliminated from one of the equations and to be substituted in the others to have left $n$ equations. Also the constant that turns up additively to $\varepsilon$ is to be set to zero. Both tasks are automatically fulfilled, if, as described above, $\varepsilon$ is already eliminated from the beginning by dividing all equations of (\ref{char1}), (\ref{char2}) through one of them. On either way one ends up with $n$ equations \begin{equation} 0=g_i(\phi,w_j,c_k),\;\;i,j,k=1\ldots n \label{charsol2} \end{equation} involving $n$ constants $c_k$. The final step is to solve (\ref{charsol2}) for the $c_i$ to obtain \begin{equation} c_i = c_i(\phi, w_1,\ldots ,w_n) \;\;\;\;\;i=1,\ldots n . \label{cons} \end{equation} The final solution $\phi = \phi(w_i)$ of the PDE (\ref{PDE}) is then given implicitly through \[ 0 = F(c_1(\phi,w_i),c_2(\phi,w_i),\ldots,c_n(\phi,w_i)) \] where $F$ is an arbitrary function with $n$ arguments. \end{enumerate} %--------------------------------------- \subsection{Syntax} The call of {\tt QUASILINPDE} is \\ {\tt QUASILINPDE}({\it de}, {\it fun}, {\it varlist}); \begin{itemize} \item {\it de} is the differential expression which vanishes due to the PDE {\it de}$\; = 0$ or, {\it de} may be the differential equation itself in the form $\;\;\ldots = \ldots\;\;$. \item {\it fun} is the unknown function. \item {\it varlist} is the list of variables of {\it fun}. \end{itemize} The result of {\tt QUASILINPDE} is a list of general solutions \[ \{{\it sol}_1, {\it sol}_2, \ldots \}. \] If {\tt QUASILINPDE} can not solve the PDE then it returns $\{\}$. Each solution ${\it sol}_i$ is a list of expressions \[ \{{\it ex}_1, {\it ex}_2, \ldots \} \] such that the dependent function ($\phi$ in (\ref{PDE})) is determined implicitly through an arbitrary function $F$ and the algebraic equation \[ 0 = F({\it ex}_1, {\it ex}_2, \ldots). \] %--------------------------------------- \subsection{Examples} {\em Example 1:}\\ To solve the quasilinear first order PDE \[1 = xu,_x + uu,_y - zu,_z\] for the function $u = u(x,y,z),$ the input would be \small \begin{verbatim} depend u,x,y,z; de:=x*df(u,x)+u*df(u,y)-z*df(u,z) - 1; varlist:={x,y,z}; QUASILINPDE(de,u,varlist); \end{verbatim} \normalsize In this example the procedure returns \[\{ \{ x/e^u, ze^u, u^2 - 2y \} \},\] i.e. there is one general solution (because the outer list has only one element which itself is a list) and $u$ is given implicitly through the algebraic equation \[ 0 = F(x/e^u, ze^u, u^2 - 2y)\] with arbitrary function $F.$ \\ {\em Example 2:}\\ For the linear inhomogeneous PDE \[ 0 = y z,_x + x z,_y - 1, \;\;\;\;\mbox{for}\;\;\;\;z=z(x,y)\] {\tt QUASILINPDE} returns the result that for an arbitrary function $F,$ the equation \[ 0 = F\left(\frac{x+y}{e^z},e^z(x-y)\right) \] defines the general solution for $z$. \\ {\em Example 3:}\\ For the linear inhomogeneous PDE (3.8) from \cite{KamkePDE} \[ 0 = x w,_x + (y+z)(w,_y - w,_z), \;\;\;\;\mbox{for}\;\;\;\;w=w(x,y,z)\] {\tt QUASILINPDE} returns the result that for an arbitrary function $F,$ the equation \[ 0 = F\left(w, \;y+z, \;\ln(x)(y+z)-y\right) \] defines the general solution for $w$, i.e.\ for any function $f$ \[ w = f\left(y+z, \;\ln(x)(y+z)-y\right) \] solves the PDE. %--------------------------------------- \subsection{Limitations of {\tt QUASILINPDE}} One restriction on the applicability of {\tt QUASILINPDE} results from the program {\tt CRACK} which tries to solve the characteristic ODE-system of the PDE. So far {\tt CRACK} can be applied only to polynomially non-linear DE's, i.e.\ the characteristic ODE-system (\ref{char3}),(\ref{char4}) or (\ref{char3a}) may only be polynomially non-linear, i.e.\ in the PDE (\ref{PDE}) the expressions $a_i$ and $b$ may only be rational in $w_j,\phi$. The task of {\tt CRACK} is simplified as (\ref{charsol1}) does not have to be solved for $w_j, \phi$. On the other hand (\ref{charsol1}) has to be solved for the $c_i$. This gives a second restriction coming from the REDUCE function {\tt SOLVE}. Though {\tt SOLVE} can be applied to polynomial and transzendential equations, again no guarantee for solvability can be given. %------------------------------------------------------------------------- \section{Transformation of DEs} %--------------------------------------- \subsection{The content of {\tt DETRAFO}} Finally, after having found the finite transformations, the program {\tt APPLYSYM} calls the procedure {\tt DETRAFO} to perform the transformations. {\tt DETRAFO} can also be used alone to do point- or higher order transformations which involve a considerable computational effort if the differential order of the expression to be transformed is high and if many dependent and independent variables are involved. This might be especially useful if one wants to experiment and try out different coordinate transformations interactively, using {\tt DETRAFO} as standalone procedure. To run {\tt DETRAFO}, the old functions $y^{\alpha}$ and old variables $x^i$ must be known explicitly in terms of algebraic or differential expressions of the new functions $u^{\beta}$ and new variables $v^j$. Then for point transformations the identity \begin{eqnarray} dy^{\alpha} & = & \left(y^{\alpha},_{v^i} + y^{\alpha},_{u^{\beta}}u^{\beta},_{v^i}\right) dv^i \\ & = & y^{\alpha},_{x^j}dx^j \\ & = & y^{\alpha},_{x^j}\left(x^j,_{v^i} + x^j,_{u^{\beta}}u^{\beta},_{v^i}\right) dv^i \end{eqnarray} provides the transformation \begin{equation} y^{\alpha},_{x^j} = \frac{dy^\alpha}{dv^i}\cdot \left(\frac{dx^j}{dv^i}\right)^{-1} \label{trafo} \end{equation} with {\it det}$\left(dx^j/dv^i\right) \neq 0$ because of the regularity of the transformation which is checked by {\tt DETRAFO}. Non-regular transformations are not performed. {\tt DETRAFO} is not restricted to point transformations. In the case of contact- or higher order transformations, the total derivatives $dy^{\alpha}/dv^i$ and $dx^j/dv^i$ then only include all $v^i-$ derivatives of $u^{\beta}$ which occur in \begin{eqnarray*} y^{\alpha} & = & y^{\alpha}(v^i,u^{\beta},u^{\beta},_{v^j},\ldots) \\ x^k & = & x^k(v^i,u^{\beta},u^{\beta},_{v^j},\ldots). \end{eqnarray*} %--------------------------------------- \subsection{Syntax} The call of {\tt DETRAFO} is \begin{tabbing} {\tt DETRAFO}(\=\{{\it ex}$_1$, {\it ex}$_2$, \ldots , {\it ex}$_m$\}, \\ \>\{{\it ofun}$_1=${\it fex}$_1$, {\it ofun}$_2=${\it fex}$_2$, \ldots ,{\it ofun}$_p=${\it fex}$_p$\}, \\ \>\{{\it ovar}$_1=${\it vex}$_1$, {\it ovar}$_2=${\it vex}$_2$, \ldots , {\it ovar}$_q=${\it vex}$_q$\}, \\ \>\{{\it nfun}$_1$, {\it nfun}$_2$, \ldots , {\it nfun}$_p$\},\\ \>\{{\it nvar}$_1$, {\it nvar}$_2$, \ldots , {\it nvar}$_q$\}); \end{tabbing} where $m,p,q$ are arbitrary. \begin{itemize} \item The {\it ex}$_i$ are differential expressions to be transformed. \item The second list is the list of old functions {\it ofun} expressed as expressions {\it fex} in terms of new functions {\it nfun} and new independent variables {\it nvar}. \item Similarly the third list expresses the old independent variables {\it ovar} as expressions {\it vex} in terms of new functions {\it nfun} and new independent variables {\it nvar}. \item The last two lists include the new functions {\it nfun} and new independent variables {\it nvar}. \end{itemize} Names for {\it ofun, ovar, nfun} and {\it nvar} can be arbitrarily chosen. As the result {\tt DETRAFO} returns the first argument of its input, i.e.\ the list \[\{{\it ex}_1, {\it ex}_2, \ldots , {\it ex}_m\}\] where all ${\it ex}_i$ are transformed. %--------------------------------------- \subsection{Limitations of {\tt DETRAFO}} The only requirement is that the old independent variables $x^i$ and old functions $y^\alpha$ must be given explicitly in terms of new variables $v^j$ and new functions $u^\beta$ as indicated in the syntax. Then all calculations involve only differentiations and basic algebra. %------------------------------------------------------------------------- \section{Availability} The programs run under {\tt REDUCE 3.4.1} or later versions and are available by anonymous ftp from 138.37.80.15, directory {\tt ~ftp/pub/crack}. %The manual file {\tt APPLYSYM.TEX} gives more details on the syntax. \begin{thebibliography}{99} \bibitem{WHer} W.\,Hereman, Chapter 13 in vol 3 of the CRC Handbook of Lie Group Analysis of Differential Equations, Ed.: N.H.\,Ibragimov, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida (1995). Systems described in this paper are among others: \\ DELiA (Alexei Bocharov et.al.) Pascal \\ DIFFGROB2 (Liz Mansfield) Maple \\ DIMSYM (James Sherring and Geoff Prince) REDUCE \\ HSYM (Vladimir Gerdt) Reduce \\ LIE (V. Eliseev, R.N. Fedorova and V.V. Kornyak) Reduce \\ LIE (Alan Head) muMath \\ Lie (Gerd Baumann) Mathematica \\ LIEDF/INFSYM (Peter Gragert and Paul Kersten) Reduce \\ Liesymm (John Carminati, John Devitt and Greg Fee) Maple \\ MathSym (Scott Herod) Mathematica \\ NUSY (Clara Nucci) Reduce \\ PDELIE (Peter Vafeades) Macsyma \\ SPDE (Fritz Schwarz) Reduce and Axiom \\ SYM\_DE (Stanly Steinberg) Macsyma \\ Symmgroup.c (Dominique Berube and Marc de Montigny) Mathematica \\ STANDARD FORM (Gregory Reid and Alan Wittkopf) Maple \\ SYMCAL (Gregory Reid) Macsyma and Maple \\ SYMMGRP.MAX (Benoit Champagne, Willy Hereman and Pavel Winternitz) Macsyma \\ LIE package (Khai Vu) Maple \\ Toolbox for symmetries (Mark Hickman) Maple \\ Lie symmetries (Jeffrey Ondich and Nick Coult) Mathematica. \bibitem{lie1} S.\,Lie, Sophus Lie's 1880 Transformation Group Paper, Translated by M.\,Ackerman, comments by R.\,Hermann, Mathematical Sciences Press, Brookline, (1975). \bibitem{lie2} S.\,Lie, Differentialgleichungen, Chelsea Publishing Company, New York, (1967). \bibitem{LIEPDE} T.\,Wolf, An efficiency improved program {\tt LIEPDE} for determining Lie - symmetries of PDEs, Proceedings of the workshop on Modern group theory methods in Acireale (Sicily) Nov.\,(1992) \bibitem{Riq} C.\,Riquier, Les syst\`{e}mes d'\'{e}quations aux d\'{e}riv\'{e}es partielles, Gauthier--Villars, Paris (1910). \bibitem{Th} J.\,Thomas, Differential Systems, AMS, Colloquium publications, v.\,21, N.Y.\,(1937). \bibitem{Ja} M.\,Janet, Le\c{c}ons sur les syst\`{e}mes d'\'{e}quations aux d\'{e}riv\'{e}es, Gauthier--Villars, Paris (1929). \bibitem{Topu} V.L.\,Topunov, Reducing Systems of Linear Differential Equations to a Passive Form, Acta Appl.\,Math.\,16 (1989) 191--206. \bibitem{Alex} A.V.\,Bocharov and M.L.\,Bronstein, Efficiently Implementing Two Methods of the Geometrical Theory of Differential Equations: An Experience in Algorithm and Software Design, Acta.\,Appl. Math.\,16 (1989) 143--166. \bibitem{Olv} P.J. Olver, Applications of Lie Groups to Differential Equations, Springer-Verlag New York (1986). \bibitem{Reid1} G.J.\,Reid, A triangularization algorithm which determines the Lie symmetry algebra of any system of PDEs, J.Phys.\,A: Math.\,Gen.\,23 (1990) L853-L859. \bibitem{FS} F.\,Schwarz, Automatically Determining Symmetries of Partial Differential Equations, Computing 34, (1985) 91-106. \bibitem{Fush} W.I.\,Fushchich and V.V.\,Kornyak, Computer Algebra Application for Determining Lie and Lie--B\"{a}cklund Symmetries of Differential Equations, J.\,Symb.\,Comp.\,7 (1989) 611--619. \bibitem{Ka} E.\,Kamke, Differentialgleichungen, L\"{o}sungsmethoden und L\"{o}sungen, Band 1, Gew\"{o}hnliche Differentialgleichungen, Chelsea Publishing Company, New York, 1959. \bibitem{KamkePDE} E.\,Kamke, Differentialgleichungen, L\"{o}sungsmethoden und L\"{o}sungen, Band 2, Partielle Differentialgleichungen, 6.Aufl., Teubner, Stuttgart:Teubner, 1979. \bibitem{Wo} T.\,Wolf, An Analytic Algorithm for Decoupling and Integrating systems of Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations, J.\,Comp.\,Phys., no.\,3, 60 (1985) 437-446 and, Zur analytischen Untersuchung und exakten L\"{o}sung von Differentialgleichungen mit Computeralgebrasystemen, Dissertation B, Jena (1989). \bibitem{WoBra} T.\,Wolf, A. Brand, The Computer Algebra Package {\tt CRACK} for Investigating PDEs, Manual for the package {\tt CRACK} in the REDUCE network library and in Proceedings of ERCIM School on Partial Differential Equations and Group Theory, April 1992 in Bonn, GMD Bonn. \bibitem{WM} M.A.H.\,MacCallum, F.J.\,Wright, Algebraic Computing with REDUCE, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1991). \bibitem{Mal} M.A.H.\,MacCallum, An Ordinary Differential Equation Solver for REDUCE, Proc.\,ISAAC'88, Springer Lect.\,Notes in Comp Sci. 358, 196--205. \bibitem{Step} H.\,Stephani, Differential equations, Their solution using symmetries, Cambridge University Press (1989). \bibitem{Karp} V.I.\,Karpman, Phys.\,Lett.\,A 136, 216 (1989) \bibitem{Cham} B.\,Champagne, W.\,Hereman and P.\,Winternitz, The computer calculation of Lie point symmetries of large systems of differential equations, Comp.\,Phys.\,Comm.\,66, 319-340 (1991) \bibitem{Markus} M.\,Kubitza, private communication \end{thebibliography} \end{document}