Abstract
The weighted finite element method makes it possible to find an approximate solution of a boundary value problem with corner singularity without loss of accuracy. The construction of this numerical method is based on the introduction of the concept of an -generalized solution for a boundary value problem with a singularity. In this paper, special weighted sets based on the corresponding operators from the definition of the -generalized solution of the Stokes problem in a nonsymmetric variational formulation are introduced. The properties and relationships of these weighted sets are established.
MSC:
35Q30; 35A20
1. Introduction
Mathematical models of natural processes in domains with reentrant corners on the boundary play an important role in fracture mechanics. The presence of reentrant corner on the boundary causes a singularity in the solution of the problem. The solution of the Dirichlet problem for the Poisson equation in the domain with one corner with vertex at the origin can be written as
where r is a distance from point to is a sufficiently smooth function, are polar coordinates at the point and is the cutoff function [1].
The generalized solution of this problem belongs to the space , where for is any positive number. The classical finite element method (FEM) or finite difference method lose accuracy in the process of finding an approximate solution This happens due to the presence of a singular component in the solution of a boundary value problem. According to the principle of coordinated estimates, the approximate solution converges to the exact one with a rate (see [2,3]). This leads to a significant increase in computer power and computation time to find a solution with a given accuracy. Traditionally, the acceptable rate of convergence of the approximate solution to the exact solution is .
We note several approaches to find an approximate solution of hydrodynamic problems in domains with corner singularity that increase its convergence rate compared to classical approaches. The first one [4] is based on enrichment of the FE spaces by singular components. The second approach [5] use mesh geometrically refined in the neighborhood of a reentrant corner. The third method [6] relies on the definition of dual functions to the singular components and the extension of the variational problem statement using auxiliary equations. The fourth approach [7] is based on the approximation of stress coefficients for the singular components of the solution, knowing that we find the regular components of the solution. In the fifth method (see [8]), the original non-convex polygonal domain is divided into subdomains with simple geometry (without reentrant corners) and the Strang-Fix algorithm is implemented So that the dimension of the discrete space increases in the vicinity of the singularity point. The sixth one relies on the selection of several neighborhoods for the singularity point and introduction of auxiliary bilinear forms, the so-called energy-corrected FEM (see [9]).
We proposed to define the solution of a boundary value problem with a singularity as an -generalized one [10]. The introduction of a weight function into the definition of a weak solution makes it possible to reduce the influence of the singularity on the accuracy in finding the approximate solution. We have proposed a weighted FEM, which allow us to find an approximate solution of boundary value problems with a strong and corner singularity, without loss of accuracy with a rate . The method was constructed and investigated for the third boundary value problem for a second-order elliptic Equation [11], for the Maxwell’s Equations [12,13], for the Lamé system [14,15] and for an elasticity problem with a crack [16,17]. In [18,19,20], weighted FEM was developed for the Stokes and Oseen problems.
To create and research the convergence of numerical methods for problems with a corner singularity, it is necessary to study the existence, uniqueness and regularity of the solution. The early work on the study of the regularity theory in non-convex domains for hydrodynamics problems include a paper [21], which was developed in [22,23,24,25]. In particular, in [22,23] authors used and generalized the results for the Stokes and Navier–Stokes problems in the Sobolev spaces with Kondrat’ev-type weights, which were proposed in [1] for elliptic and parabolic problems. In recent years, it should be noted papers [26,27,28] which are devoted to study the differential properties of hydrodynamic problems solutions.
The study of the existence and uniqueness of the -generalized solution of boundary value problems for the second-order elliptic equations and the Lamé system was held in [29,30,31]. To investigate the -generalized solution of hydrodynamic problems with a corner singularity, it is required to examine the properties of their operators in a nonsymmetric variational formulation. This paper is devoted to the study of special weighted sets related to the operators of the Stokes problem.
The structure of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we state a Stokes problem and introduce the necessary notation. Define the -generalized solution in a nonsymmetric variation formulation in weighted sets. Section 3 is devoted to the study of properties of sets related to the operators of the Stokes problem. Finally, some concluding remarks are given in Section 4.
2. Problem Statement
The Stokes problem is to find the velocity field and pressure p which satisfy the system of differential equations and boundary conditions
Let be a non-convex polygonal domain with one reentrant corner with vertex at the origin Let us briefly describe the behavior of the solution of Equations (1)–(3) in a neighborhood of the reentrant corner (for more details see, for example, [1,21]). The components of solution in polar coordinates are linear combinations of singular components and regular remainders. The singular ones of the function and p have an asymptotic and , respectively, where is an eigenvalue of the Stokes operator, satisfying, in the case homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions, the following equation:
In particular, if is equal to then the smallest positive eigenvalue, characterizing the behavior of the solution in the neighborhood of the reentrant corner is approximately equal to
In order to determine the -generalized solution of the Equtions (1)–(3) we introduce the spaces and sets of functions. Denote by the intersection of the disk of radius centered at the origin with a closure of Define the function in which we will call a weight function satisfying the conditions: if and otherwise. Let , are non-negative integers, , .
Denote by weighted spaces of functions with bounded norms
respectively. Let be the seminorm of the second space. Denote by a closure relative to the norm (5) of the set of infinitely differentiable compactly supported functions in .
We define the following conditions for the functions
where is a positive constant, is a small positive parameter that does not depend on and
Denote by the set of functions from the space satisfying (6) and (7) with bounded norm (4). Define the subset with bounded norm (4). Let and are sets of functions from the spaces and , respectively, satisfying (6)–(8) with bounded norm (5). We will assume that a linear combination of functions from () also belongs to ().
We will highlight space (set) of vector functions in bold style, that is, () with bounded vector norm Analogically spaces (sets) of vector functions and ( and ) with a vector norm (5).
Define bilinear and linear forms
Definition 1.
Let us introduce the notation
3. Properties of Functions from Sets and
3.1. Construction of the Function Using the Function and Their Relationship
Let For any function there exists a function (see [32]), such that The function belongs to the space and satisfies the following conditions:
We define a function and prove the following lemma.
Lemma 1.
Proof.
Without loss of generality, consider
Firstly, note that in , hence the condition (6) is satisfied.
Secondly,
For an arbitrary , we have
The condition (7), up to a constant, is satisfied.
Thirdly,
The condition (8), up to a constant, is satisfied.
Lemma 1 is proved. □
Remark 1.
It will be proved in Theorem 1 that the functionIn view of this fact, Lemma 1 and an equalitywe conclude that
3.1.1. Auxiliary Statements
We need the following auxiliary statements.
Lemma 2.
(Friedrichs’s inequality). For anythe inequality
holds, whereis a positive constant that does not depend on z.
Let us prove the statement connecting the integrals in and .
Lemma 3.
Proof.
Using the condition (6), we have
Lemma 3 is proved. □
Lemma 3 implies the following corollaries.
Let us prove the connection between functions from the sets and
Lemma 4.
Functionif and only ifand the inequalities
hold.
Proof.
1. Let , then the function and vanishes on . Further
Hence,
Substituting (25) into (23), we obtain the estimate (21). Since then combined with (21), we have a sequence of inequalities
Thus,
2. Let then the function and vanishes on . Let us show that under conditions (6)–(8), i.e., We estimate the quantity . We have
and
hence
Using the same reasoning as in the output (25), we conclude
Lemma 4 is proved. □
Let us prove an analogue of the Friedrichs’s inequality in the set
Lemma 5.
Letthen there existssuch that for anyand any functionthe inequality
holds, where constant
3.1.2. Belonging of the Function to the Set
In Lemma 6 we estimate the norm of the function by the norm of the function of the space and in Lemma 7 we estimate their seminorms of the space
Lemma 6.
Letthen there existssuch that for anyany functionand forrepresented asan estimate
holds, where
Proof.
By definition we have
then
that is
Estimate the second term on the right-hand side (29), using (13) and (24) for . Applying (10) and (11) and the arguments of Lemma 3, we get
Lemma 6 is proved. □
Lemma 7.
Letthen there existssuch that for anyany functionand forrepresented asan estimate
holds, where
Proof.
By definition we have
For arbitrary :
Hence
We get
For
Consider two cases
(1) if then
(2) if then
Therefore
Due to the fact that we conclude
Similarly to we estimate
Substituting the right-hand sides of inequalities (37)–(39) instead of the left-hand ones in (34), we have
Applying Lemma 5 to the second term on the right-hand side (40), then taking into account and using Lemma 5 to the function (obtained sum of the last two terms on the right-hand side), we conclude
Lemma 7 is proved. □
Let us prove that the function belongs to the set We obtain an estimate of its norm by the norm of the function in the spaces
Theorem 1.
Letthen there exists, such that for anyany functionrepresented asfunctionbelongs to the setand an estimate
holds, where
3.1.3. Connection between the Function in the Norm of the Space and the Bilinear Form
We introduce the notation
Let us estimate J from (42) in the next lemma.
Lemma 8.
Letthen there existssuch that for anyany functionand forrepresented asan equality
holds.
Proof.
We have
Due to the fact that
we express
Applying formula (24), for we conclude
then, using this and Corollary 1, its inequality (19), we have
The first term on the right-hand side (45) is estimated by analogy with (21), applying inequalities (14) and (40). So that we get a sequence of inequalities
Lemma 8 is proved. □
Let us prove the main result of Section 3.1.3.
Theorem 2.
There existssuch that forthere existssuch that for anyany functionand forrepresented asthe estimate
holds.
Proof.
In addition, we need the definition of the function in the norm of the space
Insofar as
then
Now we express , as in (50), another way:
Thus
Now we estimate from (52) separately.
1. We have
2. Using (13), with , we get
Applying the inequality, we conclude
Find the sum of terms from (54) over using the representation and in terms of , the definition and Corollary 1 for :
that is
3. Using (13), with , we have
Consider two cases: (a) if then
and
We use the inequality for both terms on the right-hand side (56):
(b) if then
and
We use the inequality for the right-hand side (58):
Find the sum of the terms (57) and (59) over using the representation of and by , the definition and Corollary 2, then
that is
Let us use the inequality for the right-hand side (61), the definition of in terms of and Lemma 3 for :
that is
Let us use the inequality for the right-hand side (63), the definition of in terms of and Lemma 3 for :
that is
Let us estimate the right-hand side (65) using the definitions of and in terms of , Lemma 3 for and Corollary 1 for :
that is
7. Using (13), with and , we have
Similarly, as in the study of the , we consider two cases:
(a) if then
and
that is
(b) if then
and
that is
8. Using (13), with and , we have
Consider two cases:
(a) if , then
(b) if then
that is
Apply inequalities (53), (55), (60), (62), (64), (66), (69) and (72) to evaluate the right-hand side of (52):
then, using the definition (42) we have
We apply the result of Lemma 8, the inequality (43), to estimate the third term on the right-hand side of (73):
Now we estimate the second, fourth and fifth terms on the right-hand side (74). For the second term we apply Lemma 4, the inequality (22) for vector functions, then
We estimate the fourth term using the inequality (28) of Lemma 6:
For the fifth term we apply the inequality (27) of Lemma 5, then
Substituting the relations obtained above into (74), we conclude
where
It remains to apply Lemma 2 for the last term on the right-hand side (75):
Hence
where .
If we choose in (76) then for there exists for which and for any ( is less than of Lemma 5) the sequence of inequalities
holds.
Theorem 2 is proved. □
3.2. Construction of the Function Using the Function and Their Relationship
Let Consider a function such that there exists a function , where ( satisfies the conditions (10)–(12)), which has the form
Next, we define the function
Remark 2.
3.2.1. Belonging of the Function to the Set
In Lemma 9 we estimate the norm of the function using the norm of the function in the space and in Lemma 10 we estimate the seminorm in the space using the seminorm of in the space and norm in the space
Lemma 9.
Proof.
We have then and
that is
For there exists , such that for any the following sequence of inequalities
holds, thus
Lemma 9 is proved. □
Lemma 10.
Proof.
By definition of the functions and we have
For arbitrary (see Lemma 7), we get
then
and
thus
Note that and coincide with the corresponding and in the inequality (34) of Lemma 7. Hence, by analogy with the derivation of (40), we conclude
Applying Lemma 5, its estimate (27), to the second term on the right-hand side (85) and using the fact that we have
Using the inequality (79) to estimate the second term on the right-hand side (86), we obtain the estimate (83).
Lemma 10 is proved. □
Let us prove the main result of Section 3.2.1.
Theorem 3.
Letthen there exists, that for anyarbitrary functionrepresented asfunctionbelongs to the setand an estimate
holds, where a constantis equal to
3.2.2. Connection between the Function in the Norm of the Space and the Bilinear Form
Let us prove the main result of Section 3.2.2.
Theorem 4.
Proof.
For we express from the equality (49), we have
Then, we take the derivative with respect to the variable
Let us express as in (89), in another way:
We will estimate each term in (91) separately.
1. We have
2. Due to the fact that (see Theorem 2), then using the inequality, by analogy with (64), we conclude
The first term on the right-hand side (93) has the form (42), then applying the inequality (45), we derive
3. To estimate , we employ the inequality
Using (13), for we have
Consider two cases:
(a) if then
and
(b) if then
and
Summing the inequalities (95) over all , and applying the estimates (96) and (97), and Corollary 2, we conclude
hence
By analogy with (93), applying the estimate (45) to the first term on the right-hand side (98), we derive
Summing over applying Corollary 2 and using the equality we conclude
By analogy with (93), applying the estimate (45) to the first term on the right-hand side (100), we get
5. Due to the fact that (see Theorem 2) and applying the inequality, by analogy with (55), we have
6. Due to the fact that (see Theorem 2), by analogy with (66), we conclude
7. Using (13), with and we have
Consider two cases:
(a) if then
and
therefore
(b) if then
and
we get
Combining the inequalities (104) and (105) for and using the definition of the vector function , Corollaries 1 and 2 for the components and the function estimates (19) and (20), respectively, we conclude
hence
Consider two cases:
(a) if then
that is
(b) if then
that is
Combining the inequalities (107) and (108) for using the definition functions and , Lemma 3 and Corollary 1 for their components, estimates (16) and (19), respectively, we conclude
hence
Substituting the obtained estimates (92), (94), (99), (101)–(103), (106), (109) to (91), we get
that is
Evaluating the third term on the right-hand side (110) using Lemma 10 (see (83)), by analogy with (22), taking into account (14), we conclude
hence
To estimate the norm of the last term on the right-hand side (110), we apply Lemma 5, its inequality (27), then
To evaluate the last two terms on the right-hand side (110), we apply (112) in combination with the inequality (79) of Lemma 9, then
Due to the fulfillment of Lemma 2, taking into account the inequalities (111) and (113), the estimate (110) takes the following form:
where and
If we choose then for there exists , such that and for any :
Theorem 4 is proved. □
4. Conclusions
In the present paper, an -generalized solution of the Stokes problem with a corner singularity in a nonsymmetric variational formulation is defined. The properties of functions from special sets of the corresponding operators of the variational formulation are proved. The statements established in the paper will contribute to the study of the existence and uniqueness of the -generalized solution in weighted sets. The results and methods of the paper are supposed to be generalized to other problems of hydrodynamics with a corner singularity in a nonsymmetric variational formulation. In particular, for solving problems with the mixed boundary conditions. In the case when the domain filled up with fluid. One part of the boundary is a fixed wall and the other one is both the input and output of the channel. For example, when the homogeneous Dirichlet condition is set on the first part expressing a no-slip behavior of the fluid on the fixed walls of the channel. On the second part a condition where is the outer normal vector expresses the “do nothing“ boundary condition.
Previously, we assumed that an -generalized solution of hydrodynamic problems (see, for example, [18,20]) exists and is unique in the corresponding weighted sets. So certain decision makes it possible to create an efficient numerical approach—weighted FEM for finding an approximate solution of the problem with high accuracy. Using the weighted method, the ranges for choosing the optimal approach parameters, such as , and ( is the exponent of the weight function in the FE basis) are experimentally established depending on the value of the reentrant corner to achieve convergence . We have established that the order of convergence does not depend on the value of the reentrant corner for the Stokes [19], Oseen [20] and elasticity theory problems (see, for example, [15]) in the case when the Dirichlet conditions are set on the boundary. In addition, a numerical analysis of the elasticity problem [33] was carried out in the case when the Dirichlet boundary condition is set on one side of the reentrant corner, and the Neumann condition on the other one. As it is known [2], in this case the classical FEM loses its order of accuracy twice as compared to when the Dirichlet-Dirichlet or Neumann-Neumann conditions are given on the sides of the reentrant corner. If we apply a weighted FEM based on the concept of the -generalized solution, then there is no loss of accuracy. Moreover, the approximate solution (see [33]) converges to the exact one with the first order with respect to the grid step, regardless of the reentrant corner. The weighted FEM is simple to implement and does not require mesh refinement in the vicinity of the singularity point.
Author Contributions
V.A.R. and A.V.R. contributed equally and significantly in writing this article. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
The reported study of V.A.R. presented in Theorems 3 and 4 was supported by Russian Science Foundation, project No. 21-11-00039, https://rscf.ru/en/project/21-11-00039/, (accessed on 16 February 2022).
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Kondrat’ev, V.A. Boundary-value problems for elliptic equations in domains with conical or angular points. Trans. Mosc. Math. Soc. 1967, 16, 227–313. [Google Scholar]
- Ciarlet, P.G. The Finite Element Method for Elliptic Problems; Studies in Mathematics and Its Applications; North-Holland: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1978; 530p. [Google Scholar]
- Samarskii, A.A.; Lazarov, R.D.; Makarov, V.L. Finite Difference Schemes for Differential Equations with Generalized Solutions; Visshaya Shkola: Moscow, Russia, 1987; 296p. [Google Scholar]
- Lubuma, J.M.-S.; Patidar, K.C. Towards the implementation of the singular function method for singular perturbation problems. Appl. Math. Comput. 2009, 209, 68–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Babuska, I.; Strouboulis, T. The Finite Element Method and its Reliability. Numerical Mathematics and Scientific Computation; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2001; 814p. [Google Scholar]
- Pyo, J.H.; Jang, D.K. Algorithms to apply finite element dual singular function method for the Stokes equations including singularities. J. Korean Soc. Ind. Appl. Math. 2019, 23, 115–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, H.J.; Kweon, J.R. A finite element method for singular solutions of the Navier – Stokes equations on a non-convex polygon. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2016, 292, 342–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salem, A.; Chorfi, N. Solving the Stokes problem in a domain with corners by the mortar spectral element method. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 2016, 2016, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- John, L.; Pustejovska, P.; Wohlmuth, B.; Rude, U. Energy-corrected finite element methods for the Stokes system. IMA J. Numer. Anal. 2017, 37, 687–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A. Methods of numerical analysis for boundary value problem with strong singularity. Russ. J. Numer. Anal. Math. Model. 2009, 24, 565–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Rukavishnikova, H.I. The finite element method for a boundary value problem with strong singularity. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2010, 234, 2870–2882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Mosolapov, A.O. Weighted edge finite element method for Maxwell’s equations with strong singularity. Dokl. Math. 2013, 87, 156–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Mosolapov, A.O. New numerical method for solving time-harmonic Maxwell equations with strong singularity. J. Comput. Phys. 2012, 231, 2438–2448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Nikolaev, S.G. Weighted finite element method for an Elasticity problem with singularity. Dokl. Math. 2013, 88, 705–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Nikolaev, S.G. On the Rν-generalized solution of the Lamé system with corner singularity. Dokl. Math. 2015, 92, 421–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Mosolapov, A.O.; Rukavishnikova, E.I. Weighted finite element method for elasticity problem with a crack. Comput. Struct. 2021, 243, 106400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A. Body of optimal parameters in the weighted finite element method for the crack problem. J. Appl. Comput. Mech. 2021, 7, 2159–2170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Rukavishnikov, A.V. Weighted finite element method for the Stokes problem with corner singularity. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2018, 341, 144–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Rukavishnikov, A.V. New approximate method for solving the Stokes problem in a domain with corner singularity. Bull. South Ural. State Univ. Ser. Math. Model. Program. Comput. Softw. 2018, 11, 95–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Rukavishnikov, A.V. New numerical method for the rotation form of the Oseen problem with corner singularity. Symmetry 2019, 11, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dauge, M. Stationary Stokes and Navier–Stokes system on two- or three-dimensional domains with corners. I. Linearized equations. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 1989, 20, 74–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Orlt, M.; Sändig, M. Regularity of viscous Navier–Stokes flows in nonsmooth domains. In Boundary Value Problems and Integral Equations in Nonsmooth Domains; Costabel, M., Dauge, M., Nicaise, S., Eds.; Marcel Dekker: New York, NY, USA, 1995; pp. 185–201. [Google Scholar]
- Guo, B.; Schwab, C. Analytic regularity of Stokes flow on polygonal domains in countably weighted Sobolev spaces. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2006, 190, 487–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Choi, H.J.; Kweon, J.R. The stationary Navier–Stokes system with no-slip boundary condition on polygons: Corner singularity and regularity. Commun. Partial Differ. Equ. 2013, 38, 1235–1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chorfi, N. Geometric singularities of the Stokes problem. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2014, 2014, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, B. An explicit formula for corner singularity expansion of the solutions to the Stokes equations in a polygon. Int. J. Numer. Anal. Model. 2020, 17, 900–928. [Google Scholar]
- Anjam, Y.N. The qualitative analysis of solution of the Stokes and Navier–Stokes system in non-smooth domains with weighted Sobolev spaces. AIMS Math. 2021, 6, 5647–5674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marcati, C.; Schwab, C. Analytic regularity for the incompressible Navier-stokes equations in polygons. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 2020, 52, 2945–2968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A. On the existence and uniqueness of an Rν-generalized solution of a boundary value problem with uncoordinated degeneration of the input data. Dokl. Math. 2014, 90, 562–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Rukavishnikova, E.I. Existence and uniqueness of an Rν-generalized solution of the Dirichlet problem for the Lamé system with a corner singularity. Differ. Equ. 2019, 55, 832–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Rukavishnikova, E.I. On the Dirichlet problem with corner singularity. Mathematics 2020, 8, 1870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Girault, V.; Raviart, P.-A. Finite Element Method for Navier–Stokes Equations, Theory and Algorithms; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1986; 392p. [Google Scholar]
- Rukavishnikov, V.A.; Rukavishnikova, E.I. Weighted Finite-Element Method for Elasticity Problems with Singularity. Finite Element Method. Simulation, Numerical Analysis and Solution Techniques; Pacurar, R., Ed.; IntechOpen Limited: London, UK, 2018; pp. 295–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).