I have an acoustic research problem that leads to the following integral formulation: \begin{align} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}p(\mathbf{y},\tau)\frac{\partial}{\partial y_i}\left(n_i \delta(f) |\nabla f|\right) g(\mathbf{x} - \mathbf{y}, t-\tau) d^3\mathbf{y} d\tau, \end{align} where $p$ is a scalar function, $n_i=\nabla f / |\nabla f|$ is the normal vector of my control surface, and $\delta(f)$ is the dirac delta with my level set function, $f$, the zero set of which describes the control surface. $g$ is a numerical green's function. If legal, I would like to use the vector property, \begin{align} \nabla \cdot (\psi \mathbf{v}) = \nabla \psi \cdot \mathbf{v} + \psi \nabla \cdot \mathbf{v}, \end{align} to convert the integrand to a form such as \begin{align} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}p(\mathbf{y},\tau)\left[ \frac{\partial n_i}{\partial y_i} \left(\delta(f) |\nabla f|\right) + n_i\frac{\partial}{\partial y_i} \left(\delta(f) |\nabla f|\right) \right] g(\mathbf{x} - \mathbf{y}, t-\tau) d^3\mathbf{y} d\tau. \end{align} However, since $\delta(f)$ is a distribution, I am not quite sure if
(1) this is a correct manipulation;
(2) how to deal with the second term in the bracket?

I want to convert this to a surface integral to evaluate my boundary sources, and the first term gives me just that. Thanks in advance.


1 Answer 1


First do an integration by parts:

$$\int F(\mathbf{y})\frac{\partial}{\partial y_i}\left(n_i\delta(f)|\nabla f|\right)\,d^n\mathbf{y}= -\int \delta(f)|\nabla f|n_i\frac{\partial}{\partial y_i}F(\mathbf{y})\,d^n\mathbf{y}.$$

Then use this identity,

$$\int A(\mathbf{y})\delta(f(\mathbf{y}))d^n \mathbf{y}=\int_{S}\frac{A(\mathbf{y})}{|\nabla f|}\,d^{n-1}\mathbf{y},$$

with $S$ the surface defined by $f(\mathbf{y})=0$, to arrive at

$$\int F(\mathbf{y})\frac{\partial}{\partial y_i}\left(n_i\delta(f)|\nabla f|\right)\,d^n\mathbf{y}= -\int_S n_i\frac{\partial}{\partial y_i}F(\mathbf{y})\,d^{n-1}\mathbf{y}.$$

  • $\begingroup$ I understand this. Is it possible to do it in the formulation I proposed? Or is handling the distribution like that is just not recommended? $\endgroup$ Apr 6, 2015 at 22:09
  • $\begingroup$ your formula is correct, but if you want to end up with a pure surface integral, it's not helpful. $\endgroup$ Apr 7, 2015 at 6:16
  • $\begingroup$ The first term can be transformed to surface integral using the same layer integral technique you used, but is there a way to deal with the gradient of the distribution? Is it even well-behaved? I am just trying to use this as an opportunity to learn more. Thanks! $\endgroup$ Apr 7, 2015 at 14:19
  • $\begingroup$ Ideally, I would not want to evaluate grad(F), since it has a Green's function and doing what you suggested would be pretty expensive computationally. It requires O(N^2) discrete gradient evaluation, whereas using the formulation I can compute curvature only once (but still with the problem of approximating second term). $\endgroup$ Apr 7, 2015 at 14:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.