# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

January  2009, 5(1): 115-126. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2009.5.115

## A gradient method for regularizing retrieval of aerosol particle size distribution function

 1 Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, P.O.Box 9825, Beijing 100029, China 2 College of Art and Science, Beijing Union University, Beijing 100083, China

Received  February 2008 Revised  November 2008 Published  December 2008

The determination of the aerosol particle size distribution function using the particle spectrum extinction equation is an ill-posed integral equation of the first kind ([15, 19]). Even for finite moment case, the problem is still discrete ill-posed, since as is known, in remote sensing the observations are often limited /insufficient or contaminated. To overcome the ill-posedness, various standard or non-standard regularization techniques were developed (see [18] and references therein). However, most of the literature focuses on the application of the Phillips-Twomey's regularization or its variants which is unstable in several cases. Recently in [17], the authors considered Tikhonov's smooth regularization method in $W^{1,2}$ space for ill-posed inversion. But the method still relies on the choice of the regularization parameter and the a priori estimation of the noise level. In addition, these methods do not consider the nonnegative constraints of the model problem. As is known, the particle size distribution is always nonnegative and we are often faced with incomplete data. Therefore, creation of data to establish well-posedness and development of suitable method are urgently needed. We first present a regularization model which incorporates smoothness constraint to the solution, and then propose an efficient gradient method for solving the regularizing problem. Numerical tests are performed to show the efficiency and feasibility of the proposed algorithms.
Citation: Yanfei Wang, Qinghua Ma. A gradient method for regularizing retrieval of aerosol particle size distribution function. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2009, 5 (1) : 115-126. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2009.5.115
 [1] 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 [2] Luke Finlay, Vladimir Gaitsgory, Ivan Lebedev. Linear programming solutions of periodic optimization problems: approximation of the optimal control. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2007, 3 (2) : 399-413. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2007.3.399 [3] Alexandr Mikhaylov, Victor Mikhaylov. Dynamic inverse problem for Jacobi matrices. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2019, 13 (3) : 431-447. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2019021 [4] 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 [5] 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 [6] Ademir Fernando Pazoto, Lionel Rosier. Uniform stabilization in weighted Sobolev spaces for the KdV equation posed on the half-line. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2010, 14 (4) : 1511-1535. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2010.14.1511 [7] Ardeshir Ahmadi, Hamed Davari-Ardakani. A multistage stochastic programming framework for cardinality constrained portfolio optimization. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2017, 7 (3) : 359-377. doi: 10.3934/naco.2017023 [8] 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 [9] Ian Schindler, Kyril Tintarev. Mountain pass solutions to semilinear problems with critical nonlinearity. Conference Publications, 2007, 2007 (Special) : 912-919. doi: 10.3934/proc.2007.2007.912 [10] Valeria Chiado Piat, Sergey S. Nazarov, Andrey Piatnitski. Steklov problems in perforated domains with a coefficient of indefinite sign. Networks & Heterogeneous Media, 2012, 7 (1) : 151-178. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2012.7.151 [11] M. Mahalingam, Parag Ravindran, U. Saravanan, K. R. Rajagopal. Two boundary value problems involving an inhomogeneous viscoelastic solid. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2017, 10 (6) : 1351-1373. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2017072 [12] Xue-Ping Luo, Yi-Bin Xiao, Wei Li. Strict feasibility of variational inclusion problems in reflexive Banach spaces. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020, 16 (5) : 2495-2502. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2019065 [13] Samir Adly, Oanh Chau, Mohamed Rochdi. Solvability of a class of thermal dynamical contact problems with subdifferential conditions. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2012, 2 (1) : 91-104. doi: 10.3934/naco.2012.2.91 [14] Elvise Berchio, Filippo Gazzola, Dario Pierotti. Nodal solutions to critical growth elliptic problems under Steklov boundary conditions. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2009, 8 (2) : 533-557. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2009.8.533 [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] A. Aghajani, S. F. Mottaghi. Regularity of extremal solutions of semilinaer fourth-order elliptic problems with general nonlinearities. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2018, 17 (3) : 887-898. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2018044 [18] 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

2019 Impact Factor: 1.366