in this paper we develop a globally convergent numerical method for a 1-d inverse medium problem in the frequency domain .
the performance of this method is tested on both computationally simulated and experimental data .
propagation of electromagnetic waves is used in experiments . a theorem about the global convergence of our method
is proved .
another name for inverse medium problems is coefficient inverse problems ( cips ) .
we model the process as a 1-d cip due to some specifics of our data collection procedure , see subsection 6.2 .
this paper is the first one in which the globally convergent method of @xcite is extended to the case of the frequency domain .
indeed , the original version of that method works with the laplace transform of the time dependent data .
both the 3-d and the 1-d versions of the method of @xcite were verified on experimental data , see @xcite for the 3-d case and karch , ksnf1,ksnf2 for the 1-d case .
the experimental data here are the same ones as in @xcite .    compared with the previous publications @xcite , two additional difficulties occurring here
are : ( 1 ) we now work with complex valued functions instead of real valued ones and , therefore ( 2 ) it is not immediately clear how to deal with the imaginary part of the logarithm of the complex valued solution of the forward problem . on the other hand , we use that logarithm in our numerical procedure . besides
, the previous numerical scheme of @xcite is significantly modified here .
we call a numerical method for a cip _ globally convergent _ if there is a rigorous guarantee that this method reaches at least one point in a sufficiently small neighborhood of the correct solution without any advanced knowledge about this neighborhood .
it is well known that the topic of the global convergence for cips is a highly challenging one .
thus , similarly with the above cited publications , we prove the global convergence of our method within the framework of a certain approximation . this is why the term approximate global convergence `` was used in above cited references ( global convergence '' in short ) .
that approximation is used only on the first iterative step of our algorithm and it is not used in follow up iterations .
besides , this approximation is a quite natural one , since it amounts to taking into account only the first term of a certain asymptotic behavior and truncating the rest .
the global convergence property is verified numerically here on both computationally simulated and experimental data .
cips are both highly nonlinear and ill - posed .
these two factors cause the non - convexity of conventional tikhonov functionals for these problems .
it is well known that typically those functionals have multiple local minima and ravines , see , e.g. numerical examples of multiple local minima in scales and on figure 5.3 of @xcite .
figure 5.4 of @xcite demonstrates an example of a ravine .
hence , there is no guarantee of the convergence of an optimization method to the correct solution , unless the starting point of iterations is located in a sufficiently small neighborhood of that solution .
however , it is often unclear in practical scenarios how to reach that neighborhood .    in our inverse algorithm we solve a sequence of linear ordinary differential equations of the second order on the interval @xmath0 .
the peculiarity here is that we have overdetermined boundary conditions for these equations : we have the solution and its first derivative at @xmath1 and we have the first derivative of the solution at @xmath2 .
our attempts to use only boundary conditions at @xmath1 did not lead to good reconstruction results .
the same observation is in place in remark 5.1 on page 13 of ksnf1 .
thus , similarly with @xcite , we use here the quasi - reversibility method ( qrm ) .
the qrm is well suitable to solve pdes with the overdetermined boundary data . to analyze the convergence rate of the qrm
, we use a carleman estimate .
the qrm was first introduced by lattes and lions @xcite .
however , they have not established convergence rates . these rates were first established in @xcite , where it was shown that carleman estimates are the key tool for that goal .
a survey of applications of carleman estimates to qrm can be found in @xcite .
chapter 6 of @xcite describes the use of the qrm for numerical solutions of cips .
we also mention an active work with the qrm of bourgeois and dard , see , e.g. @xcite for some samples of their publications .
our experimental data are given in the time domain . to obtain the data in the frequency domain
, we apply the fourier transform .
previously the same data were treated in works @xcite of this group . in that case
the laplace transform was applied .
next , the 1-d version of the globally convergent method of @xcite was used .
indeed , the original version of this method works with the laplace transform of the time dependent data .
a similar 1-d inverse problem in the frequency domain was solved numerically in @xcite by a different method .
the experimental data of this publication were collected by the forward looking radar which was built in the us army research laboratory @xcite .
the data were collected in the field ( as opposed to a laboratory ) .
thus , clutter was present at the measurement site .
this certainly adds some additional difficulties to the imaging problem .
the goal of this radar is to detect and identify shallow explosives , such as , e.g. improvised explosive devices and antipersonnel land mines .
those explosives can be located either on the ground surface or a few centimeters below this surface .
this radar provides only a single time dependent curve for a target .
therefore , to solve a cip , we have no choice but to model the 3-d process by a 1-d wave - like pde .
we model targets as inclusions whose dielectric constants are different from the background .    in terms of working with experimental data ,
the goal in this paper is not to image locations of targets , since this is impossible via solving a cip with our data , see subsection 6.2 for details .
in fact , our goal is to image maximal values of dielectric constants of targets .
our targets are 3-d objects , while we use a 1-d model : since we measure only one time resolved curve for a target .
nevertheless , we show below that our calculated dielectric constants are well within tabulated limits @xcite .    of course , an estimate of the dielectric constant is insufficient for the discrimination of explosives from the clutter . on the other hand ,
the radar community mostly relies on the intensity of the radar image .
therefore , we hope that the additional information about values of dielectric constants of targets might lead in the future to designs of algorithms which would better discriminate between explosives and clutter .    in the 3-d case the globally convergent method of @xcite works with the data generated either by a single location of the source or by a single direction of the incident plane wave .
the second globally convergent method for this type of measurements was developed and tested numerically in @xcite .
we also refer to another globally convergent methods for a cips , which is based on the multidimensional version of the gelfand - levitan method .
this version was first developed by kabanikhin kab1 and later by kabanikhin and shishlenin @xcite . unlike bk1,bk2,tbkf1,tbkf2 , the technique of @xcite works with multiple directions of incident plane waves .
in @xcite the performance of the method of @xcite was compared numerically with the performance of the krein equation @xcite for the same experimental data as ones used here .
the krein equation krein is close to the gelfand - levitan equation @xcite .
it was shown in @xcite that the performance of the krein equation is inferior to the performance of the method of @xcite for these experimental data .
this is because the solution of the krein equation is much more sensitive to the choice of the calibration factor than the solution obtained by the technique of @xcite .
on the other hand , it is necessary to apply that factor to those experimental data to make the range of values of the resulting data comparable with the range of values of computationally simulated data .
in section 2 we pose forward and inverse problems and analyze some of their features . in section 3
we study a 1-d version of the qrm . in section 4
we present our globally convergent method .
in section 5 we prove the global convergence of our method .
in section 6 we present our numerical results for both computationally simulated and experimental data .
it was shown numerically in @xcite that the component of the electric field , which is incident upon a medium , dominates two other components .
it was also shown in @xcite that the propagation of that component is well governed by a wave - like pde .
furthermore , this finding was confirmed by imaging from experimental data , see chapter 5 of @xcite and tbkf1,tbkf2 .
thus , just as in @xcite , we use a 1-d wave - like pde to model the collection of our experimental data of electromagnetic waves propagation .      let @xmath3 be two positive numbers .
let the function @xmath4 satisfy the following conditions:@xmath5 , \forall x\in \mathbb{r } ,   \label{2.1 } \\
c\left ( x\right ) & = & 1+\beta \left ( x\right ) , \beta \left ( x\right ) = 0,\forall x\notin \left ( 0,1\right ) .
\label{2.3}\end{aligned}\]]fix the source position @xmath6 .
consider the generalized helmholtz equation in the 1-d case,@xmath7let @xmath8 be the solution of the problem ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.6 ] ) for the case @xmath9 then@xmath10the problem , is the forward problem .
our interest is in the following inverse problem problem :    fix the source position @xmath11 let @xmath12\subset \left ( 0,\infty \right ) $ ] be an interval of frequencies @xmath13 . reconstruct the function @xmath14 assuming that the following function @xmath15 is known @xmath16 .
\label{2.7}\ ] ]      in this subsection we establish existence and uniqueness of the forward problem .
even though these results are likely known , we present them here for reader s convenience .
in addition , the techniques using in their proofs help us to verify that the function @xmath17 never vanishes for @xmath18 , which plays an important role in our algorithm of solving the to cip .
also , this technique justifies the numerical method for solving the forward problem ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.6 ] ) .
computationally simulated data are obtained by numerically solving the problem ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.6 ] ) .
[ thm unique forward ] assume that conditions ( [ 2.1])-([2.3 ] ) hold .
then for each @xmath19 and for each @xmath6 there exists a single solution @xmath20 of the problem ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.6 ] ) .
moreover , the function @xmath21 , called the scattering field , is in @xmath22 .    * proof*. we prove uniqueness first .
suppose that @xmath23 and @xmath24 are two solutions of the problem ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.6 ] ) .
denote @xmath25 then the function @xmath26 satisfies @xmath27since the function @xmath28 outside of the interval @xmath29 then ( [ 2.8 ] ) implies that @xmath30 for @xmath31 this , together with ( [ 2.9 ] ) , yields @xmath32where @xmath33 and @xmath34 are some complex numbers depending on @xmath35    let @xmath36 be an arbitrary number . multiply both sides of ( [ 2.8 ] ) by the function @xmath37 and integrate over the interval @xmath38 using integration by parts .
we obtain@xmath39by ( [ 2.11 ] ) @xmath40 and @xmath41 hence , the imaginary part of ( [ 2.12 ] ) , @xmath42 vanishes , so do @xmath43 and @xmath44 . using ( [ 2.11 ] ) , we obtain @xmath45 for @xmath46 due to the classical unique continuation principle , @xmath47 thus , @xmath48 .
we now prove existence .
consider the 1-d analog of the lippman - schwinger equation with respect to a function @xmath49 , @xmath50fix @xmath6 and @xmath19 .
consider equation ( [ 2.13 ] ) only for @xmath51 assume that there exist two functions @xmath52 satisfying ( [ 2.13 ] ) for @xmath53 consider their extensions on the set @xmath54 via the right hand side of ( [ 2.13 ] ) .
then so defined functions @xmath52 satisfy ( [ 2.13 ] ) for all @xmath55 @xmath56 hence , both of them are solutions of the problem ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.6 ] ) .
hence , the above established uniqueness result implies that @xmath57    consider again the integral equation ( [ 2.13 ] ) for @xmath58 and apply the fredholm alternative .
this alternative , combined with the discussion in the previous paragraph , implies that there exists unique solution @xmath59 $ ] of equation ( [ 2.13 ] ) . extending this function for @xmath60 via the right hand side of ( [ 2.13 ] )
, we obtain that there exists unique solution @xmath61 of equation ( [ 2.13 ] ) .
furthermore , the function @xmath62 and also this function @xmath49 is the required solution of the problem ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.6 ] ) .
@xmath63    below we consider only such a solution @xmath64 of the problem ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( 2.6 ) that @xmath65 : as in theorem 2.1 .
consider the function @xmath67 defined as @xmath68note that by ( [ 2.3 ] ) @xmath69 for @xmath70 .$ ]    [ thm assymptotic u ] assume that the function @xmath71 .$ ] then for every pair @xmath72 , the asymptotic behavior of the function @xmath20 is @xmath73 \left ( 1+o\left ( \frac{1}{k}\right ) \right ) , k\rightarrow \infty .
\label{201}\]]furthermore , for any finite interval @xmath74 there exists a number @xmath75 such that for all @xmath76 the function @xmath20 can be analytically extended with respect @xmath13 from @xmath77 in the half plane @xmath78 .
* proof*. consider the following cauchy problem@xmath79this proof is based on the connection between the solution @xmath64 of the problem ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.6 ] ) and the solution @xmath80 of the problem ( [ 2.15 ] ) , ( [ 2.16 ] ) via the fourier transform with respect to @xmath81 . here and below the fourier transform
is understood in terms of distributions , see , e.g. the book @xcite for the fourier transform of distributions .
we now obtain a hyperbolic equation with potential from equation ( [ 2.15 ] ) .
to do this , we use a well known change of variables @xmath82 @xcite@xmath83denote @xmath84 by ( [ 2.17 ] ) @xmath85 hence , ( [ 2.15 ] ) and ( [ 2.16 ] ) become@xmath86consider now a new function @xmath87 where the function @xmath88 is chosen in such a way that the coefficient at @xmath89 becomes zero after the substitution @xmath90 in equation ( [ 2.18 ] ) .
then ( [ 2.18 ] ) and ( [ 2.19 ] ) become@xmath91 it follows from ( [ 2.1 ] ) , ( [ 2.3 ] ) , ( [ 2.17 ] ) and ( [ 2.24 ] ) that the function @xmath92 and has a finite support , @xmath93recall that @xmath67 is the function defined in ( [ 200 ] ) .
expression ( [ 2.24 ] ) in the @xmath94coordinate becomes @xmath95    let @xmath96 be the heaviside function .
it is well known that the solution @xmath97 of the problem ( [ 2.22 ] ) , ( [ 2.23 ] ) has the following form , see , e.g. chapter 2 in @xcite@xmath98    the backwards substitution @xmath99 transforms the function @xmath100 in the function @xmath101 hence , ( [ 2.250 ] ) implies that the function @xmath102 in ( [ 2.24 ] ) is non positive , @xmath103consider now the operator @xmath104 of the fourier transform,@xmath105 in the sense of distributions we have@xmath106see section 6 in  9 of chapter 2 of @xcite .
consider an arbitrary finite interval @xmath107 let @xmath108 be two arbitrary integers such that @xmath109 . since by ( [ 2.25 ] ) the function @xmath102 has a finite support , then ( [ 2.28 ] ) , lemma 6 of chapter 10 of the book @xcite as well as remark 3 after that lemma guarantee that functions @xmath110 decay exponentially with respect to @xmath111 as long as @xmath112 hence , one can apply the operator @xmath104 to the functions @xmath113 in the regular sense .
the assertion about the analytic extension follows from and the exponential decay of the functions @xmath110    let @xmath114 the next question is whether the function @xmath115 satisfies analogs of conditions ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.6 ] ) .
theorem 3.3 of @xcite and theorem 6 of chapter 9 of @xcite guarantee that the function @xmath115  satisfies the following conditions @xmath116    using ( [ 2.27 ] ) and the integration by parts , we obtain for @xmath66 @xmath117two backwards substitution : @xmath99 via ( [ 2.17 ] ) and @xmath118 imply that conditions ( [ 2.31 ] ) and ( [ 2.32 ] ) for the function @xmath115 turn into conditions ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.6 ] ) for the function @xmath64 .
thus , ( [ 2.29 ] ) and ( [ 2.33 ] ) imply ( [ 201 ] ) .
@xmath63      since the source position @xmath6 is fixed , we drop everywhere below the dependence on @xmath119 in notations of functions .
first , we show that , having the function @xmath15 in ( [ 2.7 ] ) , one can uniquely find the function @xmath120 indeed , for @xmath121 conditions ( 2.4 ) and ( [ 2.6 ] ) become@xmath122@xmath123let @xmath124 then ( [ 2.34 ] ) and ( 2.35 ) imply that@xmath125hence , @xmath126for a complex number @xmath127 .
note that by ( [ 2.60 ] ) and ( 2.7 ) @xmath128hence , by and the definition of the function @xmath129 , we have @xmath130    let @xmath131thus , , and ( [ 2.37 ] ) provide us with an additional data @xmath132 to solve our cip , where @xmath133 .
\label{2.38}\ ] ]    * * theorem 2.3 ( * * uniqueness of our cip**)**. _ let _
@xmath134 _ _  be the function defined in ( [ 200 ] ) .
assume that _ _
_  then our cip has at most one solution . _
_    * proof*. by theorem 2.2 one can analytically extend the function @xmath15 from the interval @xmath136 $ ] in the half plane @xmath137 where @xmath138 is a positive number@xmath139 hence , it follows from ( [ 2.37 ] ) and ( [ 2.38 ] ) that we know functions @xmath140 for all @xmath141 consider the inverse fourier transform of the function @xmath64 with respect to @xmath13 , @xmath142 it was established in the proof of theorem 2.2 that this transform can indeed be applied to the function @xmath64 and @xmath143 , where the function @xmath144 is the solution of the problem ( [ 2.15 ] ) , ( [ 2.16 ] ) .
functions @xmath145are known .
hence , we have obtained the inverse problem for equation ( 2.15 ) with initial conditions ( [ 2.16 ] ) and the data ( [ 2.39 ] ) .
it is well known that this inverse problem has at most one solution , see , e.g. chapter 2 of @xcite . @xmath63
as it was pointed out in section 1 , we solve ordinary differential equations with over determined boundary conditions using the qrm . in this section
, we develop the qrm for an arbitrary linear ordinary differential equation of the second order with over determined boundary conditions .
below for any hilbert space @xmath146 its scalar product is @xmath147 . for convenience ,
we use in this section the notation @xmath148 " for a generic complex valued function , which is irrelevant to the function @xmath148 in ( [ 2.37 ] ) .
let functions @xmath149 and @xmath150 be in @xmath151,\mathbb{c})$ ] and the function @xmath152 be in @xmath153,\mathbb{c})$ ] .
let @xmath154 and @xmath155 be complex numbers . in this section
we construct an approximate solution of the following problem:@xmath156the qrm for problem ( [ 3.1 ] ) amounts to the minimization of the following functional @xmath157where @xmath158 below in this section we will establish existence and uniqueness of the minimizer of @xmath159
. we will also show how close that minimizer is to the solution of if it exists .
we start from the carleman estimate for the operator @xmath160      [ lem car ] for any complex valued function @xmath162 with @xmath163 and for any parameter @xmath164 the following carleman estimate holds @xmath165 ,   \label{3.10}\]]where @xmath166 is a constant independent of @xmath64 and @xmath167    * proof*. since @xmath168)$ ] is dense in @xmath169 , it is sufficient to prove ( [ 3.10 ] ) only for functions @xmath170 .$ ] moreover , without loss of the generality , we can assume that @xmath64 is real valued .
introduce the function @xmath171 we have @xmath172a simple calculation yields @xmath173 ^{2}}{x+1}\geq \frac{4\lambda v^{\prime } \left ( v^{\prime \prime } + \lambda ^{2}v\right ) } { x+1 }   \notag \\ & \geq \frac{d}{dx}\left ( \frac{2\lambda \left ( v^{\prime } \right ) ^{2}+2\lambda ^{3}v^{2}}{x+1}\right ) + \frac{2\lambda } { ( x+1)^{2}}(\left ( v^{\prime } \right ) ^{2}+\lambda ^{2}v^{2 } ) .   \label{3.3}\end{aligned}\]]one the other hand , we have @xmath174 e^{-2\lambda x}\geq \left ( \frac{1}{3}\left ( u^{\prime }
\right ) ^{2}-\frac{\lambda ^{2}}{2}u^{2}\right ) e^{-2\lambda x}. \label{3.44}\]]combine and and then integrate the result .
we obtain @xmath175inequality follows .
@xmath63      we first establish the existence and uniqueness for the minimizer of @xmath177    [ thm unique ] for every @xmath178 there exists a unique minimizer @xmath179 of the functional @xmath180 furthermore , the following estimate holds@xmath181where the number @xmath182 depends only on @xmath183 and @xmath184 .
let @xmath185 be a minimizing sequence of @xmath159 .
that means , @xmath186it is not hard to see that @xmath187 is bounded in @xmath188 .
in fact , if @xmath187 has a unbounded subsequence then @xmath189without the loss of generality , we can assume that @xmath187 weakly converges in @xmath188 to a function @xmath190 and strongly converges to @xmath190 in @xmath169 .
the function @xmath190 belongs to @xmath191 because @xmath191 is close and convex .
we have @xmath192the uniqueness of @xmath190 is due to the strict convexity of @xmath193 .
inequality can be verified by the fact that @xmath194 where @xmath195 and the function @xmath196 $ ] is such that@xmath197 , \\   0 & x\in \lbrack 3/4,1].\end{array}\right.\]]@xmath63    let @xmath198 and @xmath199 be the real and imaginary parts respectively of the complex valued function @xmath200 . without confusing ,
we identify @xmath200 with the pair of real valued functions @xmath201 define @xmath202rewrite @xmath159 as @xmath203    in order to find @xmath190 , we find the zero of the frchet derivative @xmath204 of @xmath205
. since the operators @xmath206 and @xmath207 are linear , @xmath204 is given by @xmath208for all @xmath209 with @xmath210 the existence of a zero of @xmath204 follows from the above existence of @xmath190 and the uniqueness is , again , deduced from the convexity of @xmath159 and @xmath191 . in our computations
, we use the finite difference method to approximate the equation @xmath211 , together with the condition @xmath212 , as a linear system for @xmath190 .
the minimizer @xmath190 of @xmath159 is called the regularized solution of @xcite .      while theorem 3.1 claims the existence and uniqueness of the regularized solution @xmath190 of problem ( [ 3.1 ] )
, we now prove convergence of regularized solutions to the exact solution of this problem , provided that the latter solution exists , see @xcite for the definition of the regularized solution .
it is well known that one of concepts of the tikhonov regularization theory is the _ a priori _ assumption about the existence of an exact solution of an ill - posed problem , i.e. solution with noiseless data @xcite .
estimate ( [ 3.4 ] ) is valid for the @xmath213norm and it becomes worse as long as @xmath214 however , theorem 3.2 provides an estimate for the @xmath215norm and the latter estimate is not worsening as @xmath214 to prove theorem 3.2 , we use the carleman estimate of subsection 3.1 .
suppose that there exists the exact solution @xmath216 of the problem ( 3.1 ) with the exact ( i.e. noiseless ) data @xmath217 , @xmath218 .
let the number @xmath219 be the level of the error in the data , i.e.@xmath220 let @xmath179 be the unique minimizer of the functional @xmath221 , which is guaranteed by theorem [ thm unique ] .
assume that ( [ 3.12 ] ) holds .
then there exists a constant @xmath222 depending only on @xmath223 and @xmath224 such that the following estimate holds@xmath225 \right ) .
\label{3.13}\]]in particular , if @xmath226 then the following convergence rate of regularized solutions @xmath190 takes place ( with a different constant @xmath227)@xmath228 \right ) \delta .
\label{30}\]][thm convergence of regularized solutions ]    * proof*. in this proof , @xmath227 is a generic constant depending only on @xmath223 and @xmath229 let the function @xmath230 $ ] satisfies the following condition @xmath197 , \\   0 & x\in \lbrack 3/4,1].\end{array}\right.\]]define the error " function @xmath231obviously , @xmath232since @xmath190 is the minimizer of @xmath233 then we have for all @xmath234 with @xmath235 @xmath236since @xmath216 is a solution of , then @xmath237 denoting @xmath238 , using the test function @xmath239 , and using the cauchy - schwarz inequality , we derive in a standard way from ( [ 3.12 ] ) , and that @xmath240on the other hand , lemma [ lem car ] gives @xmath241 .\end{aligned}\]]choosing @xmath242 sufficiently large , we obtain @xmath243combining this and completes the proof .
[ lem nonzero ] fix @xmath6 and @xmath19 .
let @xmath20 be the solution of the problem ( [ 2.4])-([2.6 ] ) .
then @xmath244 in particular , @xmath245,$ ] where @xmath15 is the function defined in ( [ 2.7 ] ) .
* proof*. the proof is similar to that of the uniqueness of the problem , in theorem [ thm unique forward ] .
@xmath246    below @xmath247 is the function defined in ( [ 2.37 ] ) . since by theorem 2.2
@xmath248 then we can consider @xmath249 since @xmath250 then the natural question is about @xmath251 hence , we consider the asymptotic behavior at @xmath66 of the function @xmath252 . using ( [ 2.60 ] ) and theorem 2.2 , we obtain for @xmath18 @xmath253 \left ( 1+o\left ( \frac{1}{k}\right ) \right ) .
\label{4.0}\]]obviously @xmath254 $ ] for sufficiently large @xmath255 hence , we set for sufficiently large @xmath19 and for @xmath256@xmath257the function @xmath258 is defined via ( [ 4.01 ] ) for sufficiently large @xmath259 on the other hand , for not large values of @xmath13 it would be better to work with derivatives of @xmath249 indeed , we would not have problems then with defining @xmath260 hence , taking @xmath261 sufficiently large , we define the function @xmath262 as @xmath263differentiate with respect to @xmath13 .
we have @xmath264 multiplying both sides of the equation above by @xmath265 gives @xmath266since @xmath267 , then @xmath268the function @xmath269 , therefore , defines @xmath270 .    for each @xmath271 , define @xmath272    it follows from ( [ 2.7 ] ) , ( [ 2.37 ] ) and ( [ 4.0 ] ) that @xmath273 as @xmath274 hence , @xmath275 $ ] for sufficiently large @xmath255 hence , the function @xmath276 can be defined similarly with the function @xmath277 in ( [ 4.2 ] ) .
let @xmath278,k\in \lbrack \underline{k},\overline{k } ] .
\label{4.1}\]]hence,@xmath279denote@xmath280we call @xmath281 the tail function " and this function is unknown . note that we do not use below the function @xmath281 .
rather we use only its @xmath94derivatives .
hence , when using these derivatives , we are not concerned with @xmath282    it easily follows from ( [ 2.3 ] ) , ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.60 ] ) , ( [ 2.37 ] ) and ( [ 2.38 ] ) that @xmath283using ( [ def log w ] ) and ( [ 4.3 ] ) , we obtain @xmath284therefore , ( [ 4.1])-([4.40 ] ) imply that @xmath285@xmath286@xmath287 , q_{x}\left ( 0,k\right ) = 0 .
\label{4.6}\ ] ]    we have obtained an integral differential equation ( [ 4.5 ] ) for the function @xmath288 with the overdetermined boundary data ( [ 4.6 ] ) .
the tail function in ( [ 4.5 ] ) is also unknown .
hence , to approximate both functions @xmath288 and @xmath281 , we need to use not only conditions ( [ 4.5 ] ) , ( 4.6 ) but something else as well .
thus , in our iterative procedure , we solve problem ( [ 4.5 ] ) , ( [ 4.6 ] ) , assuming that @xmath281 is known , and update the function @xmath288 this way .
then we update the unknown coefficient @xmath289 next , we solve problem ( [ 4.3 ] ) , ( [ 4.4 ] ) for the function @xmath148 at @xmath290 and update the tail function via ( 4.1 ) , ( [ 4.20 ] ) and ( [ 4.21 ] ) .
it is important for the above iterative process to properly choose the initial approximation @xmath292 for the tail function .
since we want to construct a globally convergent method , this choice must not use any advanced knowledge of a small neighborhood of the exact solution @xmath293 of our inverse problem .
we now describe how do we choose the initial tail @xmath294 it follows from theorem [ thm assymptotic u ] and the definition of @xmath295 via ( [ 4.0])- that there exists a function @xmath296 $ ] such that @xmath297hence , assuming that the number @xmath261 is sufficiently large , we drop terms @xmath298 and @xmath299 in and set@xmath300set @xmath290 in ( [ 4.5 ] ) and ( [ 4.6 ] ) and then substitute ( [ 4.7 ] ) there .
we obtain @xmath301 it follows from this , , , and that @xmath302we solve the problem ( [ guess v  ] ) , ( [ v0 boundary condition ] ) via the qrm . by the embedding theorem @xmath303
$ ] and @xmath304 } \leq c\left\vert f\right\vert _ { h^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } , \forall f\in h^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) , $ ] where @xmath305 is a generic constant@xmath139 recall that the function @xmath306 in ( [ v0 boundary condition ] ) is linked with the function @xmath15 as in ( [ 2.38 ] ) .
thus , theorems [ thm unique ] and [ thm convergence of regularized solutions ] lead to theorem [ thm 4.1 ] . in this theorem
, we use the entire interval @xmath307 $ ] rather than just @xmath308 ( in ( [ 4.11 ] ) ) for brevity : since we will use this interval below .
[ thm 4.1 ] let @xmath293 satisfying conditions ( 2.1)-([2.3 ] ) be the exact solution of our cip . for @xmath309 let the exact tail @xmath310 have the form ( [ 4.7 ] ) .
assume that for @xmath311 $ ] @xmath312where @xmath313 is a sufficiently small number , which characterizes the level of the error in the boundary data .
let the function @xmath314 be the approximate solution of the problem ( [ guess v])-([v0 boundary condition ] ) obtained via the qrm with @xmath315 .
then there exists a constants @xmath316 depending only on @xmath261 and @xmath317 such that @xmath318 } \leq c\left\vert v_{0,a}\left ( x,\overline{k}\right ) -v^{\ast } \left ( x,\overline{k}\right ) \right\vert _ { h^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } \leq c_{3}\delta .\ ] ]    [ remark 4.2 ]     1 .
@xmath319 2 .
@xmath320@xmath321@xmath308 and recalling we conclude that@xmath322@xmath323@xmath317@xmath324@xmath323@xmath317 3 .
@xmath325@xmath293 4 .    5 .
@xmath323 and @xmath326@xmath281@xmath288    below we consider the error parameter @xmath327 defined as@xmath328        consider a partition of the frequency interval @xmath330 $ ] in @xmath331 subintervals with the step size @xmath332,@xmath333where the number @xmath334 is sufficiently small .
we assume that the function @xmath335 is piecewise constant with respect to @xmath13 , @xmath336 for @xmath337 for each @xmath338 and for all @xmath339 define @xmath340hence , by ( [ 4.20])@xmath341    then ( [ 4.5 ] ) and ( [ 4.12])-([4.13 ] ) imply that for all @xmath338 @xmath342choose the step size @xmath332 sufficiently small and ignore terms with @xmath332 and @xmath343 .
note that @xmath344 for @xmath345 also , we keep in mind that we will iterate with respect to tail functions for each @xmath346 as well as with respect to @xmath346 .
thus , we rewrite the last equation as @xmath347 q_{n , j}^{\prime } = -2k_{n}\left ( -q_{n-1}^{\prime } + v_{n , j}^{\prime } \right ) ^{2}+2i\left ( -q_{n-1}^{\prime } + v_{n , j}^{\prime } \right )   \label{4.15}\]]for all @xmath348 for some @xmath349 .
the boundary conditions for @xmath350 in are taken according to those for @xmath288 in .
precisely , @xmath351      the procedure to solve the cip is described below :    we reconstruct a set @xmath352 of approximations for @xmath353    1 .
set @xmath354 find the first approximation @xmath355 for the tail function solving the problem ( [ guess v])-([v0 boundary condition ] ) via the qrm .
[ step 2 ] for an integer @xmath356 $ ] , suppose that functions @xmath357 , @xmath358 , @xmath359 are known . therefore , @xmath360 is known .
we calculate the function @xmath361 as follows
set @xmath362 , @xmath363 @xmath364 .
2 .   for @xmath365
: 1 .   solve the problem , for @xmath350 via the qrm .
2 .   for @xmath366 let @xmath367 due to an analog of .
3 .   [ step 2b3]calculate @xmath368 by , which will be explained later .
4 .   solve the problem ( [ 4.3 ] ) , ( [ 4.4 ] ) via the qrm with @xmath290 and @xmath369 .
let @xmath370 be its solution .
next , using ( 4.2 ) and ( [ 4.20 ] ) , set @xmath371 3 .
set @xmath372 where @xmath373 3 .
[ step 3 ] chose @xmath374 where @xmath375    in the algorithm , all differential equations are solved via the qrm .
thus , we keep for those qrm solutions " the same notations for brevity . for simplicity , we assume here that @xmath376 although we also work in one case of experimental data with a non - positive function @xmath377 thus , in the algorithm above , we update the function @xmath378 using ( [ 2.1 ] ) , ( [ 2.3 ] ) , ( [ 4.40 ] ) and ( [ 4.13 ] ) as@xmath379this truncation helps us to get a better accuracy in the reconstructed function @xmath380 .
in fact , it follows from ( [ 2.1 ] ) , ( [ 2.3 ] ) , and ( [ 4.2323 ] ) that @xmath381where @xmath382 is the exact solution of the cip .
in this section we prove our main result about the global convergence of the algorithm of the previous section .
this method actually has the approximately global convergence property , see the third paragraph of section [ sec:1 ] and remarks [ remark 4.2 ] . for brevity we assume in this section that @xmath383 in the above algorithm . in other words , we assume that we do not perform inner iterations .
the case @xmath384 can be done similarly .
first , we need to introduce some assumptions about the exact solution . everywhere below the superscript @xmath385
" denotes functions which correspond to the exact coefficient @xmath322 .
denote @xmath386 then @xmath387 for @xmath388 and for @xmath389 set @xmath390let the function @xmath391 be the same as in ( [ 4.14 ] ) , except that functions @xmath392 are replaced with @xmath393 also , let @xmath394then ( [ 4.40 ] ) and implies that @xmath395also , by ( [ 4.15 ] ) and ( [ 4.16 ] ) we have for @xmath0@xmath396 \left ( q_{n}^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime }   \notag \\ & = & -2k_{n}\left ( -\left ( q_{n-1}^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } + \left ( v^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } \right ) ^{2}+2i\left ( -\left ( q_{n-1}^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } + \left ( v^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } \right ) + g_{n}^{\ast } \left ( x\right ) ,   \label{5.3 } \\
q_{n}^{\ast } \left ( 0\right ) & = & \psi _ { n}^{\ast , 0},\left ( q_{n}^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } \left ( 0\right ) = \psi _ { n}^{\ast , 1},\left ( q_{n}^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } \left ( 1\right ) = 0 .
\notag\end{aligned}\]]since the number @xmath324 characterizes the error in the boundary data and since @xmath397 is the error parameter introduced in ( [ 4.110 ] ) , then , taking into account ( [ 4.16 ] ) , we set@xmath398 in ( [ 5.2 ] ) and ( [ 5.3 ] ) @xmath399 and @xmath400 are error functions , which can be estimated as @xmath401where @xmath402 is a constant .
we also assume that @xmath403 } & \leq & m,\left\vert q_{n}^{\ast } \right\vert _ { h^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } \leq m,\left\vert \left ( v^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } \right\vert _ { c\left [ 0,1\right ] } \leq m,\left\vert \left ( v^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime \prime } \right\vert _ { l^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } \leq m ,   \label{5.50 } \\
\left\vert \left ( w^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } \right\vert _ { c\left [ 0,1\right ] } & \leq & m,\left\vert \left ( w^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime \prime } \right\vert _ { l^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } \leq m.   \label{5.501}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    * theorem 5.1*. _ let conditions of theorem 4.1 hold . in procedures ( i ) and ( iv ) of the algorithm set in the qrm _ @xmath404 _
_  assume that the number _
_ _  and the number _ _ @xmath261 _ is so large that in ( [ 4.0 ] ) _ @xmath406 _ _  for _ _ @xmath407 _ _  for _ _ @xmath408
_ _  let the function _ _ @xmath409 $ ] _ be the solution of the problem ( [ 4.3 ] ) , ( [ 4.4 ] ) with the exact coefficient _ @xmath410 _ _  and the exact data _ _ @xmath411 _ let @xmath412 be an integer in @xmath413.$ ] then there exists a sufficiently large constant _ @xmath414 _ _
for which estimates ( [ 5.5])-([5.501 ] ) are valid and which also satisfies _ _ @xmath415__as well as a constant _ _
@xmath416 _ _  such that if the error parameter _
_ @xmath327 _ _  is so small that _ _
@xmath417__then for _ _ @xmath418 _ _  the following estimate holds true _
_ @xmath419    * remark 6.1 . *
_ thus , this theorem claims that our iteratively found functions _ @xmath361 _ _  are located in a sufficiently small neighborhood of the exact solution _
_ @xmath420 _ _  as long as _ _
.$ ] _ _  since this is achieved without any advanced knowledge of a small neighborhood of the exact solution _
_ @xmath422 _ _ , then theorem 5.1 implies the global convergence of our algorithm , see introduction . on the other hand , this is achieved within the framework of the approximation of subsection 4.2 .
hence , to be more precise , this is the approximate global convergence property , see section 1.1.2 of @xcite and section 4 of @xcite for the definition of this property .
recall that the number of iterations ( _ _ @xmath412 _ _  in our case ) can be considered sometimes as a regularization parameter in the theory of ill - posed problems @xcite .
_ _    * proof*. in addition to ( [ 5.10 ] ) , we will also prove that for @xmath418 @xmath423 } , \left\vert q_{n}-q_{n}^{\ast } \right\vert _ { h^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } & \leq & \left ( m_{1}m^{16}\right ) ^{n}\eta < \sqrt{\eta } ,   \label{5.8 } \\ \left\vert v_{n+1}^{^{\prime } } -\left ( v^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } \right\vert _ { c\left [ 0,1\right ] } , \left\vert v_{n+1}^{\prime \prime } -\left ( v^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime \prime } \right\vert _ { l^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } & \leq & \left ( m_{1}m^{16}\right ) ^{n}\eta < \sqrt{\eta } .
\label{5.9}\end{aligned}\]]to simplify and shorten the proof , we assume in this proof that we work only with real valued functions .
hence , we replace in two terms of ( [ 4.15 ] ) @xmath424 with 1 " and similarly in two terms of ( [ 5.3 ] ) .
the case of complex valued functions is very similar .
however , it contains some more purely technical details and is , therefore , more space consuming .
we use the mathematical induction method .
denote@xmath425using theorem 4.1 , we obtain@xmath426 } \leq m\eta
< m^{9}\eta , \text { } \left\vert v_{1}^{\prime \prime } -\left ( v^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime \prime } \right\vert _ { l^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } \leq m\eta < m^{9}\eta .
\label{5.12}\]]hence , by ( [ 5.50 ] ) and ( [ 5.7])@xmath427 } \leq 2m,\left\vert v_{1}^{\prime \prime } \right\vert _ { l^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } \leq 2 m .   \label{5.13}\]]following notations of section 3 , denote@xmath428 y^{\prime } , \label{5.14 } \\
l_{n,\ast } \left ( y\right ) & = & y^{\prime \prime } + \left [ 2k_{n}^{2}\left ( -\left ( q_{n-1}^{\prime } \right ) ^{\ast } + v^{\ast } \right ) -2ik_{n}\right ] y^{\prime } .
\notag\end{aligned}\]]define @xmath429 since all functions @xmath329 are qrm solutions of corresponding problems with @xmath430 , then , using ( [ 5.3 ] ) and ( [ 4.15 ] ) , we obtain for all functions @xmath431,@xmath432 & = & \left ( -2k_{n}\left ( -q_{n-1}^{\prime } + v_{n}^{\prime } \right ) ^{2}+2\left ( -q_{n-1}^{\prime } + v_{n}^{\prime } \right ) , l_{n}z\right ) ,   \notag \\ \left ( l_{n,\ast } q_{n}^{\ast } , l_{n}z\right ) + \eta ^{2}\left [ q_{n}^{\ast } , z\right ] & = & \left ( -2k_{n}\left ( -\left ( q_{n-1}^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } + \left ( v^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } \right ) ^{2},l_{n}z\right )   \label{5.15 } \\ + \left ( 2\left ( -\left ( q_{n-1}^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } + \left ( v^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } \right ) ,
l_{n}z\right ) & & + \left ( g_{n}^{\ast } , z\right ) + \eta ^{2}\left [ q_{n}^{\ast } , z\right ] .   \notag\end{aligned}\]]subtracting the second equality ( [ 5.15 ] ) from the first one and using ( [ 5.14 ] ) and , we obtain@xmath433 = \left ( \left ( -2k_{n}^{2}\left ( -\widetilde{q}_{n-1}^{\prime } + \widetilde{v}_{n}^{\prime } \right ) \left ( q_{n}^{\ast } \right ) ^{\prime } \right ) , l_{n}z\right)\]]@xmath434 .
\notag\end{aligned}\]]in addition , by ( [ 5.4])@xmath435    we now explain the meaning of the constant @xmath436 since the constant @xmath437 in theorem 3.3 depends on @xmath438norms of coefficients of the operator @xmath439 in ( [ 3.1 ] ) , we need to estimate from the above the @xmath438norm of the coefficient of the operator @xmath440 in ( [ 5.14 ] ) . if ( [ 5.8 ] ) is true , then using ( [ 5.50 ] ) and ( [ 5.7 ] ) and noting that by ( [ 5.11 ] ) @xmath441 } \leq \left\vert   \widetilde{q}_{n}\right\vert _ { c^{1}\left [ 0,1\right ] } + \left\vert q_{n}^{\ast } \right\vert _ { c^{1}\left [ 0,1\right ] } \leq 1+m\leq 2m,$ ] we obtain@xmath442 } \leq 2m,\left\vert q_{n}\right\vert _ { h^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } \leq 2 m .
\label{5.18}\]]hence , by ( [ 4.14 ] ) @xmath443 hence , if ( [ 5.9 ] ) is also true , then the coefficient of the operator @xmath440 can be estimated as @xmath444thus , in the case of the operator @xmath440 in the analog of estimate ( [ 30 ] ) for the qrm , the constant @xmath227 should be replaced with another constant @xmath445    first , consider the case @xmath446 and estimate functions @xmath447 in this case @xmath448 and so ( [ 5.19 ] ) is an over - estimate of course .
still , to simplify the presentation , we use @xmath449 in this case . estimate first two terms in the right hand side of ( 5.16 ) at @xmath446 . by theorem 4.1 , ( [ 5.5])-([5.6 ] ) , ( [ 5.11 ] ) and ( [ 5.13 ] ) @xmath450@xmath451hence , theorem 3.3 , ( [ 5.16 ] ) , ( [ 5.17 ] ) , ( [ 5.20 ] ) and ( [ 5.21 ] ) lead to@xmath452 } \leq m_{1}\left ( 16\overline{k}^{2}m^{2}\right ) \eta < m_{1}m^{5}\eta . \label{5.22}\ ] ]    hence , ( [ 5.8 ] ) is true for @xmath446 .
we now estimate derivatives of the function @xmath453 by ( [ 5.13 ] ) and ( [ 5.18 ] ) @xmath454next , by ( [ 5.1 ] ) , ( [ 5.12 ] ) and ( [ 5.22])@xmath455 } \leq \eta \left\vert \widetilde{q}_{1}^{\prime } \right\vert _ { c\left [ 0,1\right ] } + \left\vert \widetilde{v}_{1}^{\prime } \right\vert _ { c\left [ 0,1\right ] } \leq m_{1}m^{5}\eta + m\eta \leq 2m_{1}m^{5}\eta .
\label{5.24}\]]we now estimate @xmath456 subtracting ( [ 5.2 ] ) from ( [ 4.40 ] ) and using ( 4.22 ) , ( [ 5.51 ] ) , ( [ 5.6 ] ) , ( [ 5.12 ] ) , ( [ 5.22 ] ) and ( 5.24 ) , we obtain @xmath457 } \label{5.25 } \\ & \leq & m_{1}m^{5}\eta + m\eta + 2m_{1}m^{5}\overline{k}^{2}\left ( 3m+m^{2}\right ) \eta \leq m_{1}m^{8}\eta .
\notag\end{aligned}\ ] ]    we now estimate functions @xmath458 and @xmath459 let @xmath460 recall that we find the function @xmath461 via solving the problem ( [ 4.3 ] ) , ( [ 4.4 ] ) with @xmath308 using the qrm . also , it follows from ( [ 2.38 ] ) and ( [ 4.11 ] ) that @xmath462 and @xmath463 hence , we obtain similarly with ( [ 5.15 ] ) and ( [ 5.16 ] ) @xmath464 & = & -\left ( \overline{k}^{2}\widetilde{\beta } _ { 1}w^{\ast } , a_{1}z\right ) -\eta ^{2}\left [ w^{\ast } , z\right ] , \forall z\in w_{0 } , \label{5.26 } \\ \left\vert \widetilde{w}_{1}\left ( 0\right ) \right\vert & \leq & \eta , \left\vert \widetilde{w}_{1}^{\prime } \left ( 0\right ) \right\vert \leq m\eta , \widetilde{w}_{1}^{\prime } \left ( 1\right ) = 0 .
\notag\end{aligned}\]]the function @xmath465 is the solution of a qrm problem , which is completely similar with ( [ 5.26 ] ) . since by ( 4.2323 ) functions
@xmath466 are uniformly bounded for all @xmath346 , @xmath467 then there exists an analog of the constant @xmath227 of theorem 3.2 , which estimates functions @xmath468 for all @xmath346 as solutions of analogs of problems ( [ 5.26 ] ) .
hence , we can assume that this constant equals @xmath449 .
using theorem 3.2 , ( [ 5.25 ] ) and ( [ 5.26 ] ) , we obtain@xmath469 } , \left\vert \widetilde{w}_{1}\right\vert _ { h^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } \leq m_{1}m^{10}\eta .
\label{5.27}\]]hence , using ( [ 5.7 ] ) , ( [ 5.27 ] ) and @xmath470 we obtain@xmath471 } , \left\vert w_{1}\right\vert _ { h^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } \leq 2m.\ ] ]    the final step of the proof for the case @xmath446 is to estimate derivatives of the second tail , i.e. functions @xmath472 by ( [ 4.17])@xmath473estimate the denominator in ( [ 5.29 ] ) . since @xmath474 in ( [ 4.0 ] ) for @xmath475
then ( [ 2.1 ] ) and ( [ 4.0 ] ) imply that @xmath476 for @xmath477 .$ ] hence , using ( [ 5.7 ] ) and ( [ 5.27 ] ) , we obtain @xmath478hence,@xmath479we now estimate from the above the modulus of the nominator in each of two formulas of ( [ 5.29 ] ) . using ( [ 5.501 ] ) , ( [ 5.6 ] ) and ( [ 5.27])-([5.30 ] ) , we obtain for @xmath477 $ ] @xmath480next , @xmath481hence , we obtain similarly with ( [ 5.31 ] ) @xmath482it can be easily derived from ( [ 5.7 ] ) , ( [ 5.31 ] ) and ( [ 5.32 ] ) that @xmath483 } \leq 2m$ ] and @xmath484    thus , in summary ( [ 5.22 ] ) , ( [ 5.25 ] ) , ( [ 5.31 ] ) and ( [ 5.32 ] ) imply that @xmath452 } , \left\vert \widetilde{\beta } _ { 1}\right\vert _ { l^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } , \left\vert \widetilde{v}_{2}^{\prime } \right\vert
_ { c\left [ 0,1\right ] } , \left\vert \widetilde{v}_{2}^{\prime \prime } \right\vert _ { l^{2}\left ( 0,1\right ) } \leq m_{1}m^{14}\eta .   \label{5.33}\]]in other words , estimates ( [ 5.8])-([5.10 ] ) are valid for @xmath446 .
assume that they are valid for @xmath485 where @xmath486 .
denote @xmath487 then , similarly with the above , one will obtain estimates ( [ 5.33 ] ) where 1 `` in first three terms is replaced with @xmath346 , 2 '' in the fourth and fifth terms is replaced with @xmath488 and the right hand side is @xmath489 @xmath63
in all our computation , @xmath490 and @xmath491 $ ] .
we have observed in our computationally simulated data as well as in experimental data that the function @xmath492 becomes very small for @xmath493 on the other hand , the largest values of @xmath494 were observed in some points of the interval @xmath495 $ ] .
thus , we assign in all computations @xmath496 we have used @xmath497    actually in all our computations we go along the interval @xmath495 $ ] several times .
more precisely , let @xmath498 be the result obtained in step [ step 3 ] of the above globally convergent algorithm .
set @xmath499 .
next , solve the problem the problem ( [ 4.3 ] ) , ( [ 4.4 ] ) with @xmath290 and @xmath500 .
let the function @xmath501 be its solution .
then we define derivatives of the new tail function @xmath502 as in ( [ 4.17 ] ) where @xmath503 is replaced with @xmath504 next , we go to step 2 and repeat .
the process is repeated @xmath505 times in our computational program .
we choose @xmath506 such that@xmath507@xmath508 it is also worth mentioning that in step step 2b3 , after calculating @xmath368 , we replace it by @xmath509where @xmath510 is a small neighborhood of @xmath511 , @xmath339 and @xmath512 is the length of the interval @xmath513 we also use the truncation technique to improve the accuracy of the reconstruction function @xmath514 ( see ) .      in this section
, we show the numerical reconstruction of the spatially distributed dielectric constant from computationally simulated data .
let the function @xmath515 has the form @xmath516let the function @xmath517 be the solution of problem , .
as mentioned in the proof of theorem [ thm unique forward ] ( see ) , the function @xmath517 satisfies the lippman - schwinger equation , @xmath518this equation can be approximated as a linear system .
we have solved that system numerically to computationally simulate the data .
our numerical results are displayed in figures 1 . in the top row
@xmath519 and in the bottom row @xmath520 in each figure , we show the true function @xmath515 , the data obtained by solving the forward problem with that true @xmath515 and the solution of the cip . in both cases we had two values of @xmath521 and @xmath522 these figures confirm that both the target / background contrast and the position of the target are computed with small errors .
the experimental data were collected by the forward looking radar which was built in the us army research laboratory @xcite .
the device consists of two main parts .
the first one , emitter , generates the time resolved electric pulses .
the emitter sends out only one component of the electric field .
the second part involves 16 detectors .
these detectors collect the time resolved backscattering electric signal ( voltage ) in the time domain .
the same component of the electric field is measured as the one which is generated by the emitter : see our comment about this in the beginning of section 2 .
the step size of time is 0.133 nanosecond .
the backscattering data in the time domain are collected when the distance between the radar and the target varies from 20 to 8 meters .
the average of these data with respect to both the position of the radar and those 16 detectors is the data on which we have tested our algorithm . to identify horizontal coordinates of the position of the target , ground positioning system ( gps )
the error in each of horizontal coordinates does not exceed a few centimeters .
when the target is under the ground , the gps provides the distance between the radar and a point on the ground located above the target . as to the depth of a buried target , it is not of a significant interest , since horizontal coordinates are known and it is also known that the depth does not exceed 10 centimeters .
we refer to @xcite for more details about the data collection process .
publications @xcite contain schematic diagrams of the measurements .
our interest is in computing maximal values of dielectric constants of targets . in one target ( plastic cylinder below )
we compute the minimal value of its dielectric constant , since its value was less than the dielectric constant of the ground . for each target , the only information the mathematical team ( mvk , lhn ) had , in addition to just a single experimental curve , was whether it was located in air or below the ground .
we calculate @xmath523 the relative spatial dielectric constant of the whole structure including the background ( air or the ground ) and the target . more precisely , @xmath524where @xmath525 is the subinterval of the interval @xmath29 which is occupied by the target . here
@xmath526 and @xmath527 are values of the function @xmath528 in target and background respectively .
we assume that @xmath529 for each set of experimental data . hence , @xmath530 if the target is located in air
the ground was dry sand .
it is well known that the dielectric constant of the dry sand varies between 3 and 5 @xcite .
hence , in the case of buried targets @xmath531 $ ] .    in our mathematical model
the time resolved electric signal @xmath532 collected by the detectors satisfies the equations , with @xmath515 being replaced by @xmath523 where the position @xmath119 of the source is actually unknown .
the latter is one of the difficulties of working with these data .
thus , we set in all our tests @xmath533 which is the same as in @xcite .
let @xmath534 be the function @xmath535 which we compute .
following @xcite@xmath536 , \\   \min r\left ( x\right ) \text { if } 0<r\left ( x\right ) \leq 1,\forall x\in \left [ 0,1\right ] .\end{array}\right .
\label{6.2}\]]since the dielectric constant of air equals 1 , then we have @xmath537 for targets located in air . as to the buried targets ,
we have developed a procedure of the analysis of the original time resolved data , which provides us with the information on which of two cases ( [ 6.2 ] ) takes place .
we refer to case 1 and case 2 on page 2944 of ksnf2 for this procedure .
in addition , since we had a significant mismatch of magnitudes of experimental and computationally simulated data , we have multiplied , before computations , our experimental data by the calibration number @xmath538 see @xcite for details of our choice of this number .
there is a significant discrepancy between computationally simulated and experimental data , which was noticed in our earlier publications karch , ksnf1,ksnf2 .
this discrepancy is evident from , comparison of , e.g. figure 1b with figure 2b and other similar ones .
therefore , to at least somehow mitigate this discrepancy , we perform a data pre - processing procedure .
besides of the fourier transform of the time resolved data , we multiply them by a calibration factor , truncate a certain part of the data in the frequency domain and shift the data in the frequency domain , see details below .
the function @xmath539 which we have studied in the previous sections , is the fourier transform of the time resolved data @xmath540 .
the function @xmath541 is called the data in the frequency domain " . observing that @xmath542 is small when @xmath13 belongs to a certain interval
, we do not analyze @xmath541 on that interval .
rather , we only focus on such a frequency interval which contains the major part of the information . now , to keep the consistency with our study of computationally simulated data , we always force the frequency interval to be @xmath543 $ ] . to do so
, we simply shift our data in the frequency domain : compare figures 2b and 2c , figures 2f and 2 g , figures 3b and 3c , figures 3f and 3 g and figures 3j and 3k .
we consider two cases : targets in air ( figure [ air ] ) and targets buried about a few centimeters under the ground ( figure [ ground ] ) .
we had experimental data for total of five ( 5 ) targets .
the reconstructed dielectric constants of these targets are summarized in table 1 . in this table , computed @xmath544 . in tables of dielectric constants of materials ,
their values are usually given within certain intervals @xcite .
now about the intervals of the true @xmath545 in the @xmath546 column of table 1 . in the cases when targets were a wood stake and a plastic cylinder , we have taken those intervals from a published table of dielectric constants @xcite .
the interval of the true @xmath547 for the case when the target was bush , was taken from @xcite .
as to the metal targets , it was established in @xcite that they can be considered as such targets whose dielectric constants belong to the interval @xmath548.$ ]    * * table 1 : * *  computed dielectric constants of five targets    [ cols="^,^,^,^,^,^",options="header " , ]      +
in this paper , we have developed a frequency domain analog of the 1-d globally convergent method of @xcite .
we have tested this analog on both computationally simulated and time resolved experimental data .
the experimental data are the same as ones used in karch , ksnf1,ksnf2 .
we have modeled the process of electromagnetic waves propagation by the 1-d wave - like pde .
the reason why we have not used a 3-d model , as in , e.g. earlier works of this group on experimental data bk1,tbkf1,tbkf2 , is that we had only one time resolved experimental curve for each of our five targets .
our numerical method has the global convergence property . in other words ,
we have proven a theorem ( theorem 5.1 ) , which claims that we obtain some points in a sufficiently small neighborhood of the exact solution without any advanced knowledge of this neighborhood .
our technique heavily relies on the quasi reversibility method ( qrm ) .
the proof of the convergence of the qrm is based on a carleman estimate .
a significant modification of our technique , as compared with @xcite , is due to two factors .
first , we use the fourier transform of time resolved data instead of the laplace transform in @xcite .
second , when updating tail functions via ( [ 4.17 ] ) , we solve the problem ( [ 4.3 ] ) , ( [ 4.4 ] ) using the qrm . on the other hand , in @xcite tail functions
were updated via solving the laplace transform analog " of the problem ( [ 2.4 ] ) , ( [ 2.6 ] ) as a regular forward problem    since the dielectric constants of targets were not measured in experiments , the maximum what we can do to evaluate our results is to compare them with published data in , e.g. @xcite .
results of table 1 are close to those obtained in @xcite .
one can see in table 1 that our reconstructed values of dielectric constants are well within published limits .
we consider the latter as a good result .
this is achieved regardless on a significant discrepancy between computationally simulated and experimental data , regardless on a quite approximate nature of our mathematical model and regardless on the presence of clutter at the data collection site .
that discrepancy is still very large even after the data pre - processing , as it is evident from comparison of figures 1b , e with figures 2c , g and figures 3c , g , k . besides , the source position @xmath119 was unknown but rather prescribed by ourselves as @xmath549 thus , our results indicate a high degree of stability of our method .      l.  beilina and m.v .
klibanov , a new approximate mathematical model for global convergence for a coefficient inverse problem with backscattering data , _ j. inverse and ill - posed problems _ , 20 , 512 - 565 , 2012 .
l.  beilina , energy estimates and numerical verification of the stabilized domain decomposition finite element / finite difference approach for the maxwell s system in time domain , _ central european journal of mathematics _ , 11 , 702733 , 2013 .
klibanov and j. malinsky , newton - kantorovich method for 3-dimensional potential inverse scattering problem and stability for the hyperbolic cauchy problem with time dependent data , inverse problems , 7 577 - 596 , 1991 .
kuzhuget , l. beilina , m.v .
klibanov , a. sullivan , l. nguyen and m.a .
fiddy , blind backscattering experimental data collected in the field and an approximately globally convergent inverse algorithm , _ inverse problems _ , 28 , 095007 , 2012 .    a.v .
kuzhuget , l. beilina , m.v .
klibanov , a. sullivan , l. nguyen and m.a .
fiddy , quantitative image recovery from measured blind backscattered data using a globally convergent inverse method , _ ieee transaction for geoscience and remote sensing , _ 51 , 2937 - 2948 , 2013 .
n. nguyen , d. wong , m. ressler , f. koenig , b. stanton , g. smith , j. sichina and k. kappra , obstacle avolidance and concealed target detection using the army research lab ultra - wideband synchronous impulse reconstruction ( uwb sire ) forward imaging radar , _ proc .
spie _ * 6553 * 65530h ( 1)-65530h ( 8) , 2007 .
n.  t. thnh , l.  beilina , m.  v. klibanov and m.  a. fiddy , reconstruction of the refractive index from experimental backscattering data using a globally convergent inverse method , _ siam journal on scientific computing _ , 36 ,
b273b293 , 2014 .
n.  t. thnh , l.  beilina , m.  v. klibanov and m.  a. fiddy , imaging of buried objects from experimental backscattering time dependent measurements using a globally convergent inverse algorithm , _
siam j. imaging sciences _ , 8 , 757 - 786 , 2015 .