Suppose a quantity changes at the rate , whatever the time on the clock. Will a start at drift away from , and where will it end up? Questions like these can be answered without a formula for the solution, by reading the sign of the rate on each side of the constant solutions. This lesson builds that picture, the phase line, and gives precise meanings to stable, asymptotically stable and semistable equilibria.
Key terms
Autonomous equation
Definition With as the independent variable and , a first-order equation is autonomous if it has the form
where the rate depends on the state alone and not on . Throughout this lesson is continuously differentiable on the real line, so every initial-value problem has exactly one solution on its maximal interval. A number with is an equilibrium, and the constant function for all is then a solution, called an equilibrium solution. Conversely, a constant solution has , so the equilibrium solutions are exactly the constant solutions. Because does not involve , if is a solution then so is for every constant , and starting the clock at loses nothing.
In plain words The rule for change looks only at where the state is now, never at the clock. The states where the rate is zero are states that never change.
Example The equation is autonomous, with . Its equilibria are the zeros of , namely and , so and are equilibrium solutions. The equation is not autonomous, because the rate at the state is , which changes with time. It has no equilibrium solution at all, since a constant would need for every .
Phase line
Definition The phase line of is the -axis with every equilibrium marked and, on each open interval between neighboring equilibria, an arrow toward larger where and toward smaller where . The axis carries states, not times, and the arrows show only direction, not speed. Since is continuously differentiable, two different solutions never share a point, so no solution can cross or touch an equilibrium solution. A solution that starts in one of these open intervals therefore stays in it, moves strictly in the direction of the arrow for as long as it exists, and never reaches an equilibrium at a finite time. If an equilibrium lies at the head of the arrow, the solution exists for all and tends to that equilibrium as . If the interval has no end in that direction, the solution is unbounded in that direction, and it may become infinite at a finite time.
In plain words Mark where the rate is zero, test the sign of the rate once in each gap, and draw arrows. Every nonconstant solution slides along its gap in the direction of the arrow and can approach the equilibrium ahead of it, but never reach it.
Example For , one sample value in each interval gives the signs.
| Interval | Sample value | Sign of | Arrow |
|---|---|---|---|
| negative | down | ||
| positive | up | ||
| negative | down |
With the axis drawn vertically, the arrows point away from and toward . The start gives the solution
which is defined for all and rises toward without reaching it. Differentiating gives
and since , the product is the same expression. The start gives , which decreases and tends to as increases to .
Stable and unstable equilibria
Definition An equilibrium of is stable if for every there is a such that every solution with is defined for all and satisfies for all . An equilibrium that is not stable is unstable. Then for some there are starts as close to as we like whose solutions later leave the interval . When only part of the axis is meaningful, such as for a population, stability relative to that domain uses the same definition with the starts restricted to the domain, and the scope has to be stated.
In plain words Stability is about staying close. Whatever distance is demanded, a start close enough to the equilibrium keeps the solution within that distance for all future time, and a tighter demand may need a closer start.
Example For the equilibrium is stable. A start with lies in , where the arrows point toward , so the distance to never grows, and works. The equilibrium is unstable. Take . Every start in , however close to , rises toward and reaches at some time, so no works.
Asymptotic stability
Definition An equilibrium is asymptotically stable if it is stable and there is an such that every solution with satisfies as . The set of all starts whose solutions tend to is its basin of attraction. On a phase line, an equilibrium with arrows pointing toward it from both sides is asymptotically stable.
In plain words Asymptotic stability asks for more than staying close. Nearby solutions must also settle onto the equilibrium as time goes on.
Example For the arrows point toward from both sides, and every start gives a solution with , so is asymptotically stable with basin . For every number is an equilibrium. Each one is stable, with , because every solution is constant. None is asymptotically stable, because a start at stays at forever.
Derivative test for equilibria
Definition Let be an equilibrium of , with continuously differentiable on an open interval containing . If , then is asymptotically stable. If , then is unstable. If , the test gives no conclusion. The reason is the mean value theorem. Since , we have for some between and , and when continuity keeps of the same sign as for near . So the arrows next to point toward it when and away from it when .
In plain words Near an equilibrium the rate looks like a line through it with slope . A falling line sends nearby states back, a rising line pushes them away, and a slope of zero says nothing, so the sign of itself has to be checked.
Example For the derivative is . It gives and , so is unstable and is asymptotically stable, as the phase line showed. The test is inconclusive at for each of , , and , since all four rates have derivative there. Their signs give four different answers. The equilibrium is asymptotically stable for , unstable for , semistable for , and stable but not asymptotically stable for the zero rate.
Semistability
Definition An equilibrium of is semistable if, for some , the rate has the same strict sign on and on . Both arrows next to then point the same way. If on both sides, solutions just below rise toward it and solutions just above rise away from it, and if on both sides the roles are reversed. A semistable equilibrium is unstable on the full line, although relative to its attracting side alone it is asymptotically stable.
In plain words A semistable equilibrium attracts from one side and repels on the other, so a small push to the wrong side is never corrected.
Example The equation has the single equilibrium , and the rate is positive on both sides. The starts and give
with maximal intervals and . Each one solves the equation, since and both equal for the first and for the second. The first rises toward as . The second started at the same distance from the equilibrium, yet it moves away and becomes infinite as increases to . Because solutions are unique, no solution reaches at a finite time and then leaves it. If only states were meaningful, the equilibrium would be asymptotically stable relative to that domain.
Check yourself
- Draw the phase line of , classify each equilibrium, and check the result with the derivative test. Where does the solution with go?
Show the answer
Factoring gives , so the equilibria are , and . Sample values give , , and . The arrows point away from on both sides, toward from both sides, and away from on both sides. So and are unstable and is asymptotically stable. The derivative gives , and , which agrees. The start lies in , where , so the solution decreases toward as without reaching it.
- For a classmate finds and concludes that is stable. Classify both equilibria correctly.
Show the answer
The equilibria are and . Since , the value shows that is asymptotically stable. At the derivative is , so the test says nothing and the signs decide. The rate is positive for and for , so both arrows next to point up. Solutions just below rise toward it, and solutions just above rise away from it toward . So is semistable, and therefore unstable. A zero derivative never proves stability.
- The equation , with the real cube root, has the equilibrium . Show that also solves it with , and explain why this does not contradict the statement that a solution never reaches or leaves an equilibrium at a finite time.
Show the answer
For we get and , so it is a solution. So is the function equal to for and to for , which rests at the equilibrium and then leaves it at . The statement assumed that is continuously differentiable, which guarantees unique solutions. Here is continuous, but its derivative is unbounded near and does not exist at . Uniqueness fails at the equilibrium, and the phase-line conclusion that solutions never reach an equilibrium no longer applies.