We have to consider the two cases x1 = 0 and x1 = 0. If x1 = 0 we have
the trivial solution. Thus, in the following we choose xi = 0.
Assume that the coefficients of the PDE do not depend on xi. Then и can
be separated as follows: u(t,xι,x2) = ^(x1,x2)≠(t,x2). With the boundary
condition u(T, xi,x2) = xι it follows ^(xi,x2)≠(T,x2) = xι and because of
x1 = 0 : φ(T,x2) = 0 for all x2. Hence, the following relationship holds:
Hx, x2) = , <r.j∙., r
After some computation the partial differential equation can be written as
(without noting the variables of the functions a, β and 7)
∩ , /ɪ ʌ, ,/. ∖( /A2(T,x2) I 2≠≈a(T,x2) 72≠z2UT,x2Λ
0 = ≠, (i,x) + ≠(i,x) 7∙ - , + /■ - ɪ ≠(T,xa) )
, , /. √n 2≠UT,x)ʌ , У ∣ t. ʌ
+^x2(t,x2) (ʃ 7 ^(T x2) / + 2 ^x2æ2(.’x2)j
without loss of generality choose the boundary condition ≠(T, x2) = 1.
Now assume that all coefficients are only time-dependent.
In the case of constant volatility, that is uv ≡ 0 and b ≡ 0 and hence
β ≡ 0 and 7 ≡ 0, we have the following solution of the PDE
∙^(t,x2) = exp ^x2 ʃ a(s)ds^ .
With this knowledge, for the general PDE with time-dependent coefficients
we try the ansatz
∙^(t,x2) = exp —-X2 a a(s)ds^ A(t).
with A(T) = 1. This leads to an ordinary first-order differential equation for
A which has the solution
A(t) = exp ^2 ʃ 2β(r) ^ʃ α(s)ds^ + 72(r) ^ʃ a(s)ds^ dr^ .
Hence, the solution of the PDE for u is
u(t,xι,x2) = xι exp ^x2 a(s)ds^
exp ^2 2^(r) ^ʃ a(s)ds^ + 72(r) ^ʃ a(s)ds^ dr
23
More intriguing information
1. The effect of globalisation on industrial districts in Italy: evidence from the footwear sector2. The changing face of Chicago: demographic trends in the 1990s
3. The Demand for Specialty-Crop Insurance: Adverse Selection and Moral Hazard
4. Distribution of aggregate income in Portugal from 1995 to 2000 within a SAM (Social Accounting Matrix) framework. Modeling the household sector
5. The name is absent
6. El Mercosur y la integración económica global
7. Technological progress, organizational change and the size of the Human Resources Department
8. CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS
9. The name is absent
10. Endogenous Heterogeneity in Strategic Models: Symmetry-breaking via Strategic Substitutes and Nonconcavities