# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

• Previous Article
Numerical analysis of an ODE and a level set methods for evolving spirals by crystalline eikonal-curvature flow
• DCDS-S Home
• This Issue
• Next Article
Flux balanced approximation with least-squares gradient for diffusion equation on polyhedral mesh
March  2021, 14(3): 881-891. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020233

## A method how to determine parameters arising in a smoldering evolution equation by image segmentation for experiment's movies

 1 Faculty of Engineering, Yamagata University, 4-3-16 Jonan, Yonezawa-shi, Yamagata 992-8510, Japan 2 Graduate School of Science and Technology, Meiji University, 1-1-1 Higashi-Mita, Tama-ku, Kawasaki-shi, Kanagawa 214-8571, Japan 3 School of Science and Technology, Meiji University, 1-1-1 Higashi-Mita, Tama-ku, Kawasaki-shi, Kanagawa 214-8571, Japan

* Corresponding author. E-mail address : uegata@meiji.ac.jp (Yasuhide Uegata)

Received  January 2019 Revised  October 2019 Published  December 2019

We propose a simple and accurate procedure how to extract the values of model parameters in a flame/smoldering evolution equation from 2D movie images of real experiments. The procedure includes a novel method of image segmentation, which can detect an expanding smoldering front as a plane polygonal curve. The evolution equation is equivalent to the so-called Kuramoto-Sivashinsky (KS) equation in a certain scale. Our results suggest a valid range of parameters in the KS equation as well as the validity of the KS equation itself.

Citation: Maika Goto, Kazunori Kuwana, Yasuhide Uegata, Shigetoshi Yazaki. A method how to determine parameters arising in a smoldering evolution equation by image segmentation for experiment's movies. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2021, 14 (3) : 881-891. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020233
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
The photographs depict snapshots from an experimental movie of spreading flame/smoldering front along a sheet of paper placed near the floor at 200th, 400th, 1000th, 1600th, $\cdots$, 4000th frames at the rate of 30 fps. Experiments were performed by the same method as [5]
The left figure depicts numerical solutions to (1), with the normal velocity (2) in which the parameters are given by the right table and $W$ is chosen for controlling the grid-point spacing to be uniform (see section 3). The solution curves evolve from inside to outside. The initial curve is a circle with the diameter $R = R_\mathrm{ini}$ with 10% noise (see [4] in detail)
(a) Jordan curve $\Gamma$      (b) Jordan polygonal curve $\mathcal{P}$
The upper-left figure depicts selected segmentation curves at frames: 400, 1000, 1600, 2200, 2800, 3400, 4000, summarizing the front evolution in the other photographs from left to right, upper to lower. The blue curve in each photograph is a segmentation curve, and the background vague region is the same as that in FIGURE 1
(Left) The total length of front $\tilde{L} [\mathrm{mm}]$ vs. the actual time $[\mathrm{second}]$. (Right) The enclosed area $\tilde{A} [\mathrm{mm}^2]$ vs. the actual time $[\mathrm{second}]$. Blue points indicate the actual values and red curves are the graphs of (23) and (24), respectively
(Left) $V^{(0)}$ vs. time, (Right) $\alpha_\mathrm{eff}$ vs. time
Discretizations of length, normal/tangent vector, and normal velocity
 $r_i=\|\boldsymbol{x}_i-\boldsymbol{x}_{i-1}\|$ : The length of $\mathcal{P}_i$ $L= \sum\limits_{i=1}^Nr_i$ : The total length of $\mathcal{P}$ $\boldsymbol{t}_i=(\boldsymbol{x}_i-\boldsymbol{x}_{i-1})/r_i$ : The unit tangent vector on $\mathcal{P}_i$ $\boldsymbol{n}_i=-\boldsymbol{t}_i^\bot$ : The outward unit normal vector on $\mathcal{P}_i$ $v_i$ : A given representative normal velocity on $\mathcal{P}_i$ $\phi_i=\mathrm{sgn}(D_i)\arccos(\boldsymbol{t}_i\cdot\boldsymbol{t}_{i+1})$ : The angle between the adjacent edges $\mathcal{P}_{i}$ and $\mathcal{P}_{i+1}$ where $D_i=\det(\boldsymbol{t}_i, \boldsymbol{t}_{i+1})$ $\boldsymbol{T}_i=(\boldsymbol{t}_i+\boldsymbol{t}_{i+1})/(2\mathsf{cos}_i)$ : The unit tangent vector at $\boldsymbol{x}_i$ where $\mathsf{cos}_i=\cos(\phi_i/2)=\|(\boldsymbol{t}_i+\boldsymbol{t}_{i+1})/2\|$ $\boldsymbol{N}_i=(\boldsymbol{n}_i+\boldsymbol{n}_{i+1})/(2\mathsf{cos}_i)$ : The outward unit normal vector at $\boldsymbol{x}_i$ $V_i=(v_i+v_{i+1})/(2\mathsf{cos}_i)$ : The normal velocity at $\boldsymbol{x}_i$
 $r_i=\|\boldsymbol{x}_i-\boldsymbol{x}_{i-1}\|$ : The length of $\mathcal{P}_i$ $L= \sum\limits_{i=1}^Nr_i$ : The total length of $\mathcal{P}$ $\boldsymbol{t}_i=(\boldsymbol{x}_i-\boldsymbol{x}_{i-1})/r_i$ : The unit tangent vector on $\mathcal{P}_i$ $\boldsymbol{n}_i=-\boldsymbol{t}_i^\bot$ : The outward unit normal vector on $\mathcal{P}_i$ $v_i$ : A given representative normal velocity on $\mathcal{P}_i$ $\phi_i=\mathrm{sgn}(D_i)\arccos(\boldsymbol{t}_i\cdot\boldsymbol{t}_{i+1})$ : The angle between the adjacent edges $\mathcal{P}_{i}$ and $\mathcal{P}_{i+1}$ where $D_i=\det(\boldsymbol{t}_i, \boldsymbol{t}_{i+1})$ $\boldsymbol{T}_i=(\boldsymbol{t}_i+\boldsymbol{t}_{i+1})/(2\mathsf{cos}_i)$ : The unit tangent vector at $\boldsymbol{x}_i$ where $\mathsf{cos}_i=\cos(\phi_i/2)=\|(\boldsymbol{t}_i+\boldsymbol{t}_{i+1})/2\|$ $\boldsymbol{N}_i=(\boldsymbol{n}_i+\boldsymbol{n}_{i+1})/(2\mathsf{cos}_i)$ : The outward unit normal vector at $\boldsymbol{x}_i$ $V_i=(v_i+v_{i+1})/(2\mathsf{cos}_i)$ : The normal velocity at $\boldsymbol{x}_i$
 [1] Sara Munday. On the derivative of the $\alpha$-Farey-Minkowski function. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2014, 34 (2) : 709-732. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2014.34.709 [2] Lekbir Afraites, Abdelghafour Atlas, Fahd Karami, Driss Meskine. Some class of parabolic systems applied to image processing. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2016, 21 (6) : 1671-1687. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2016017 [3] Ralf Hielscher, Michael Quellmalz. Reconstructing a function on the sphere from its means along vertical slices. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2016, 10 (3) : 711-739. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2016018 [4] Zhihua Zhang, Naoki Saito. PHLST with adaptive tiling and its application to antarctic remote sensing image approximation. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2014, 8 (1) : 321-337. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2014.8.321 [5] Charles Fulton, David Pearson, Steven Pruess. Characterization of the spectral density function for a one-sided tridiagonal Jacobi matrix operator. Conference Publications, 2013, 2013 (special) : 247-257. doi: 10.3934/proc.2013.2013.247 [6] Jia Cai, Guanglong Xu, Zhensheng Hu. Sketch-based image retrieval via CAT loss with elastic net regularization. Mathematical Foundations of Computing, 2020, 3 (4) : 219-227. doi: 10.3934/mfc.2020013 [7] Seung-Yeal Ha, Dongnam Ko, Chanho Min, Xiongtao Zhang. Emergent collective behaviors of stochastic kuramoto oscillators. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2020, 25 (3) : 1059-1081. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2019208 [8] Sandrine Anthoine, Jean-François Aujol, Yannick Boursier, Clothilde Mélot. Some proximal methods for Poisson intensity CBCT and PET. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2012, 6 (4) : 565-598. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2012.6.565 [9] Hong Seng Sim, Wah June Leong, Chuei Yee Chen, Siti Nur Iqmal Ibrahim. Multi-step spectral gradient methods with modified weak secant relation for large scale unconstrained optimization. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2018, 8 (3) : 377-387. doi: 10.3934/naco.2018024 [10] Armin Lechleiter, Tobias Rienmüller. Factorization method for the inverse Stokes problem. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2013, 7 (4) : 1271-1293. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2013.7.1271 [11] Qiang Guo, Dong Liang. An adaptive wavelet method and its analysis for parabolic equations. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2013, 3 (2) : 327-345. doi: 10.3934/naco.2013.3.327 [12] Tao Wu, Yu Lei, Jiao Shi, Maoguo Gong. An evolutionary multiobjective method for low-rank and sparse matrix decomposition. Big Data & Information Analytics, 2017, 2 (1) : 23-37. doi: 10.3934/bdia.2017006 [13] Deren Han, Zehui Jia, Yongzhong Song, David Z. W. Wang. An efficient projection method for nonlinear inverse problems with sparsity constraints. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2016, 10 (3) : 689-709. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2016017 [14] Boris Kramer, John R. Singler. A POD projection method for large-scale algebraic Riccati equations. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2016, 6 (4) : 413-435. doi: 10.3934/naco.2016018 [15] Petra Csomós, Hermann Mena. Fourier-splitting method for solving hyperbolic LQR problems. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2018, 8 (1) : 17-46. doi: 10.3934/naco.2018002 [16] Christina Surulescu, Nicolae Surulescu. Modeling and simulation of some cell dispersion problems by a nonparametric method. Mathematical Biosciences & Engineering, 2011, 8 (2) : 263-277. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2011.8.263 [17] Min Li. A three term Polak-Ribière-Polyak conjugate gradient method close to the memoryless BFGS quasi-Newton method. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020, 16 (1) : 245-260. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018149 [18] Manfred Einsiedler, Elon Lindenstrauss. On measures invariant under diagonalizable actions: the Rank-One case and the general Low-Entropy method. Journal of Modern Dynamics, 2008, 2 (1) : 83-128. doi: 10.3934/jmd.2008.2.83 [19] Xiaomao Deng, Xiao-Chuan Cai, Jun Zou. A parallel space-time domain decomposition method for unsteady source inversion problems. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2015, 9 (4) : 1069-1091. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2015.9.1069 [20] Marion Darbas, Jérémy Heleine, Stephanie Lohrengel. Numerical resolution by the quasi-reversibility method of a data completion problem for Maxwell's equations. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2020, 14 (6) : 1107-1133. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2020056

2019 Impact Factor: 1.233