1. Introduction
Integral equations have numerous applications in almost all branches of the sciences and many physical processes and mathematical models in Engineering are usually governed by integral equations. The main feature of these equations is that they are usually nonlinear. In particular, nonlinear integral equations arise in fluid mechanics, biological models, solid state physics, kinetics chemistry, etc. In addition, many initial and boundary value problems can be easily turned into integral equations. One type of particularly interesting equation is a nonlinear Fredholm integral equation of the form
where
,
, the function
is continuous on
and given, the kernel
is a known continuous function in
and
x is a solution to be determined.
As integral equations of the form (
1) cannot be solved exactly, we use numerical methods to solve them; we can apply different numerical techniques and some of them can be found in the references of this work.
For a general background on numerical methods for integral equations of the form (
1), the books of Atkinson [
1] and Delves and Mohamed [
2] are recommended. For a review of less recent methods, we refer the reader to the survey by Atkinson [
3]. There is a great deal of publication on the numerical solution of Equation (
1). In recent publications, different mathematical tools and numerical implementations have been applied to solve integral equations (
1). In some of these publications, certain authors extensively use methods based on different kinds of wavelets [
4,
5]. Polynomial approximation methods using different base functions, such as Chebyshev polynomials, have been introduced; see for example [
6,
7]. An approximation with Sinc functions has been developed in [
8]. Sinc methods have increasingly been recognized as powerful tools for tackling problems in applied physics and engineering [
9]. Several different variants of numerical or theoretical studies on (
1) have been developed in the literature. For some examples, see papers [
10,
11]. In terms of iterative schemes for solving Equation (
1), in [
12], we can find an iterative scheme based on the homotopy analysis method, which is a general analytic approach to obtain series solutions of various types of nonlinear equations and based on homotopy. In particular, by means of the aforementioned method, we can construct a continuous mapping of an initial guess approximation to the exact solution of the equation to be solved. In [
13], the authors present an adapted modification to the Newton–Kantorovich method. Finally, in [
14], the Newton–Kantorovich method and quadrature methods are combined to develop a new method for solving Equation (
1).
In this work, we propose using Newton’s method for solving Equation (
1). For this, we previously analysed the semilocal convergence of the method and then compared the efficacy of the method with the former techniques for solving a particular integral equation of the form (
1). The semilocal convergence results need to know the conditions of the operator involved in the equation to be solved and the starting points of the iterative methods; the results show the existence of solutions of the equation that allow us to obtain the domain of existence of a solution.
The main interest of this work is two-fold. On the one hand, we conduct a qualitative study of Equation (
1) and obtain results on the existence and uniqueness of a solution. On the other hand, we obtain the numerical resolution of the equation. For this, we previously consider a separable kernel
and we directly approximate a solution of Equation (
1). Secondly, by means of Taylor series, we consider the case of a non-separable kernel. For both aims, we use Newton’s method, which is the most well-known iterative method for solving nonlinear equations.
For the first aim, we study the application of Newton’s method to Equation (
1) by analysing the convergence of the method and use its theoretical significance to draw conclusions about the existence and uniqueness of a solution, so that we can locate a solution of the equation from a domain of existence of solutions and then obtain a domain of uniqueness of solutions that allows us to isolate the solution previously located from other possible solutions of the equation. To achieve this aim, we use Kantorovich’s technique [
15], that was developed by the Russian mathematician L. V. Kantorovich at the beginning of the 1950s and is based on the concept of “majorizing sequence”, which will be introduced later. For the second aim, we apply Newton’s method to numerically solve Equation (
1).
This paper is organized as follows. In
Section 2, we consider a particular equation of the form (
1) and present the above-mentioned Kantorovich’s technique by introducing the concept of “majorizing sequence”. In
Section 3, from the theoretical significance of Newton’s method, we obtain information about the existence and uniqueness of a solution for the nonlinear Fredholm integral equations introduced in
Section 2. Finally, in
Section 4, we illustrate all the above-mentioned with two applications where nonlinear Fredholm integral equations are involved and by considering separable and nonseparable kernels.
2. Kantorovich’s Technique
As mentioned in the introduction, this paper has two main aims: to obtain conclusions about the existence and uniqueness of a solution of (
1) by using the theoretical significance of Newton’s method and to numerically approximate a solution of (
1).
It is clear that solving (
1) is equivalent to solving the equation
, where
,
where
For solving equation
, Newton’s method is
The method has already been applied to approximate solutions of nonlinear integral equations [
16,
17]. However, the novelty of this work is in using Kantorovich’s technique to obtain a convergence result for Newton’s method when it is applied to solve (
1) and, as a consequence, us the theoretical significance of the method to draw conclusions about the existence and uniqueness of a solution of (
1) and about the region in which it is located, without finding the solution itself—this is sometimes more important than the actual knowledge of the solution. A solution is found by constructing a scalar function ad hoc which is used to define a majorizing sequence instead of using the classical quadratic polynomial of Kantorovich.
Kantorovich’s technique consists of translating the problem of solving equation
in
to solve a scalar equation
and this is done once
is fixed under certain conditions. In addition, the domains of existence and uniqueness of a solution for Equation (
1) can be determined from the positive solutions of
.
The idea of Kantorovich’s technique is easy: once a real number
is fixed, we define the scalar iterative method
such that
Condition (
4) means that the scalar sequence
majorizes the sequence
or, in other words,
is a
majorizing sequence of
. Obviously, if
is convergent,
also is. Therefore, the convergence of the sequence
is a consequence of the convergence of the sequence
and the latter problem is much easier than the former one.
2.1. The Auxiliary Scalar Function
We begin by analysing the operator
given in (
2). So, from (
2), it follows that the Fréchet derivatives of operator
are
for
, where
denotes the integer part of the real number
.
In addition,
where
with the infinity-norm. Next, taking into account that
, it follows
provided that
. Moreover, for
, we denote
for
.
On the other hand, we observe that the existence of the operator
must be guaranteed in the first step of Newton’s method, since
. The existence of
follows from the Banach lemma on invertible operators, so the operator
exists and is such that
provided that
; namely,
In addition, we denote
and do
Now, we consider
and denote
, for
. Then, as a consequence of the latter, we can find scalar functions
such that
, for
, to construct a majorizing sequence
as that given in (
3) by solving the following initial value problem (see [
18]):
It is easy to see that there exists only one solution for the last initial value problem, that is:
Notice that the scalar function defined in (
7) and used to construct the scalar sequence
given in (
3) with
defined in (
7), that majorizes
in
, is independent of
k, so we can choose any
k, such that
, to construct the last initial value problem that gives us
.
If
and using only condition (
5), we consider the initial value problem
whose unique solution also is (
7).
Once such a majorizing sequence
is determined from
, we have then to prove its convergence. For this, it is well known [
15] that it is necessary that the scalar function
has at least one positive real zero greater than or equal to
and sequence
is increasing and convergent to this zero.
2.2. The Majorizing Sequence
We begin by studying the function given in (
7). Firstly, we notice that we have considered any
in the last section, but we can consider
, so function
is reduced to
This is a consequence of the fact that
, which leads us to the sequence
, for any
, satisfies
,
, where
with
, since we have, for
and
,
for all
. Therefore, the real sequences
and
given by Newton’s method when they are constructed from
and
, respectively, can be obtained, one from the other, by translation. Besides,
, for all
, and all the results obtained previously are independent of the value
, so we choose
because, in practice, it is the most favourable situation.
Secondly, we denote
, where
is given in (
8). Note that there exists only one positive real zero
of
in
satisfying
, since
,
and
as
.
Theorem 1. If , then has two real zeros r and R such that .
Thirdly, by taking into account the classical Fourier conditions [
19] for the convergence of Newton’s method in the scalar case, we establish that sequence
is increasing and converges to
r in the following result.
Theorem 2. If , then sequence is increasing and converges to the positive real zero r of .
Fourthly, we prove a system of recurrence relations in the next theorem that guarantees that
is a majorizing sequence of
in
, whose proof is similar to that given for Lemma 7 in [
18].
Theorem 3. Suppose that , for all , and . If , then the following four bounds are satisfied for all :
- (i)
there exists and ,
- (ii)
, for ,
- (iii)
,
- (iv)
.
Note that (i), () and () are obvious if and () are not necessary to prove (), since it follows from the initial condition .
Finally, if
, we obtain a result similar to the last theorem which can be seen in [
20].