Computers and Mathematics with Applications 55 (2008) 6675

www.elsevier.com/locate/camwa

A note on the meshless method using radial basis functions

Yong Duan
School of Applied Mathematics, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, PR China
Received 11 July 2006; received in revised form 9 March 2007; accepted 16 March 2007

Abstract
In this paper, we prove some inverse inequalities for the finite dimensional subspace interpolated by radial basis functions.
The properties of these inequalities are worse than those in finite element spaces. These bad properties result in a huge condition
number for both the collocation method and Galerkin method using radial basis functions. As applications, theoretical estimates of
the condition numbers of a meshless method using radial basis functions are given.
c 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Radial basis function; Inverse inequalities; Collocation method; Galerkin method; Meshless

1. Introduction
In the last decade, meshless methods have received much attention because of their flexibility in the construction
of finite dimensional subspaces. When the dominant domain is extremely complex, traditional numerical method for
partial differential equations (PDEs), such as the finite element method, finite difference method etc, will be difficult to
carry out. Another virtue is that the meshless method does not need the generation of a mesh. It is a complicated work
in FEM. Those complications had been described recently by Griebel and Schweitzer [1] as a very time-consuming
portion of overall computation is the mesh generation from CAD input data. Typically, more than 70 percent of overall
computation is spent by mesh generators. Meshless methods mainly include GFEM (see Babuska [2]), EFGM (see
Belytschko [3]) and meshless methods using radial basis functions (RBFs) (see Kansa [4]). For details, we refer
readers to Liu [5]. In the present paper, we restrict ourselves to RBFs.
Radial basis functions are powerful tools in multi-variable approximation. The corresponding theory had been
extensively studied by Narcowich [6], Schaback [7,8], Wendland [9,10], Buhmann [11] etc. Consequently, numerical
methods for PDEs using RBFs are concentrated on by mathematicians and engineers because of their property of
being meshless. Indeed, it is:
1. A truly meshless method. We only need a set of distinct centers to construct finite dimensional spaces.
2. Dimensional independence. In other words, it can be easily extended to higher dimensional space as onedimensional ones.

E-mail address: duanyong72@yahoo.com.cn.

c 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
0898-1221/$ - see front matter
doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2007.03.011

Y. Duan / Computers and Mathematics with Applications 55 (2008) 6675

67

Both collocation and the Galerkin method using RBFs are discussed in a series of papers, for example [1217]. In
contrast to the Galerkin method, the Collocation method is more successful in numerical applications, with a lack of
theoretical analysis. For the unsymmetric collocation method, we cannot ascertain that the linear system that arises
is solvable. Actually, there are counterexamples which indicate that the matrix of the linear system is singular [18].
In [17], the author gives an analysis of a meshless Galerkin method for a Helmholtz problem with natural boundary
conditions using radial basis functions. FEM-like convergent estimates are obtained. Some techniques, for example,
Lagrange multipliers and the penalty method, are advised for Dirichlet problems. The Lagrange multipliers method
combined with RBFs needs inverse estimates in finite dimensional subspaces interpolated by the RBFs. The penalty
method is similar, which in FEM, including Babuskas method [19] and Nistches method [20].
It is well known that inverse inequality plays an important role in FEM analysis. It is used in basic theory for
FEM analysis in estimating the condition number of the stiffness matrix and domain decomposition method etc.
In this paper, we establish some inverse inequalities for finite dimensional spaces constructed by RBFs. Then, we
give estimates of condition numbers for both the collocation method and Galerkin method using RBFs. Lagrange
multipliers method coupled with RBFs and the Penalty method for Dirichlet problems are also discussed. Finally, we
introduce an application to the domain decomposition method using our meshless Galerkin method.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we introduce some basic aspects of interpolation
by RBFs. In Section 3, we prove some inequalities for spaces spanned by RBFs. In Section 4, we introduce some
applications for numerical methods for PDEs using RBFs, including the estimation of condition numbers of linear
systems, convergence of the Lagrange method, and convergence of the domain decomposition method. At last, we
draw a conclusion from this paper and point out some future work.
2. Interpolation by RBFs
For a given function space V on Rd , we define the finite dimensional space Vh V by
Vh := span{(x x1 ), (x x2 ), . . . , (x x N )} + Pdm

(1)

where : Rd  R is at least a C 1 -function, Pdm denotes the space of polynomials of degree less than m, and
X = {x1 , x2 , . . . , x N } is a set of distinct centers. h denotes the density of X , defined by
h = sup min kx x j k

(2)

xi X

where norm kk is the Euclidean norm. When m = 0, we will call strictly positive definiteness, otherwise conditional
positive definiteness of order m. For a given function f V , assuming that
f (x) =

N
X

i (x xi ) +

i=1

M
X

j p j (x)

(3)

j=1

for a basis p j (x) of Pdm , where M is the number of the basis p j (x). The corresponding interpolated problem reads:
solving the system
N
X

i (xk xi ) +

i=1
N
X

M
X

j p j (xk ) = f (xk ),

1kN

(4)

j=1

i p j (xi ) = 0,

1 j M.

(5)

i=1

In self-evident matrix formulation, the system above reads as


   
A P T E
fE
=
.
P 0
E
0

(6)

The solvability of this system is usually guaranteed by the requirements rank(P) = M N , and
kyk2 y T Ay,

y Rd ,

P y = 0.

(7)

68

Y. Duan / Computers and Mathematics with Applications 55 (2008) 6675

The condition rank(P) N will be called the Pdm -non-degeneracy of X.

Definition 2.1 ([7]). A set of centers X = {x1 , x2 , . . . , x N } is called quasi-uniform for a compact set Rd , if
there exist > 0 and h > 0 such that
1. h(x) h x
2. q = 12 mini6= j kxi x j k h
3. each set X \ {x j }, 1 j N is Pdm -non-degenerate
where
h(x) =

sup

min ky x j k

kyxk xi X

(8)

> 0 is fixed. For a quasi-uniform set of centers X , the following property holds:
G(h) F(h).

(9)

G(h), F(h) are given by Schaback in [7]. It is obvious that h d N when the set of centers is uniformly distributed.
N is the number of centers.
In [17,21], Wendland gives the Sobolev type error estimate, which is important to numerical analysis for PDEs.
Assuming that the RBFs satisfying C l with Fourier transform satisfies
(1 + ktk)2l .
(t)

(10)

the following interpolation error holds.

Lemma 2.1. Let R d be an open and bounded domain, having a Lipschitz boundary and satisfying the interior
cone condition. Denote by Su the interpolant on X = {x1 , x2 , . . . , x N } to a function u H k ( ) with k > d/2.
Then there exists a constant h 0 > 0 such that for all X with h < h 0 , where h is the density of X , the estimate
ku su k H j ( ) Ch k j kuk H k ( )
is valid for 0 j k.

(11)

For the sake of completeness, we introduce some radial basis functions below:
Gaussians
exp(ck k2 ) c > 0
3
Multiquadrics
(c2 + k k2 ) 2 N , c 6= 0
Thin-plate splines k k log k k 2N .
The RBFs introduced above are globally supported RBFs. One of the most popular classes of CS-RBFs is
introduced by Wendland in [9]. Another is given by Wu in [22]. These functions are strictly positive definite in Rd for
all d less than or equal to some fixed value d0 , and can be constructed to have any desired amount of smoothness 2.
For l = [ d2 ] + + 1 and = 0, 1, 2, 3, Wendlands function reads:
l,0 (r ) =
(1 r )l+ ,
l,1 (r ) =
(1 r )l+1
+ [(l + 1)r + 1],
2
2
l,2 (r ) =
(1 r )l+2
+ [(l + 4l + 3)r + (3l + 6)r + 3],
3
2
3
2
2
l,3 (r ) =
(1 r )l+3
+ [(l + 9l + 32l + 15)r + (6l + 36l + 45)r + (15l + 45)r + 15].

Here and throughout, =

denotes equality up to a constant factor. For example, the functions
2,0 =(1
r )2+
3,1 (r ) =(1
r )4+ [4r + 1],
4,2 (r ) =(1
r )6+ [35r 2 + 18r + 3],
5,3 (r ) =(1
r )8+ [32r 3 + 25r 2 + 8r + 1]
which are in C 0 , C 2 , C 4 , C 6 , respectively, and strictly positive definite in R3 .

Y. Duan / Computers and Mathematics with Applications 55 (2008) 6675

69

Wus CS-RBF reads:

(r ) = (1 r )6+ (5r 5 + 30r 4 + 72r 3 + 82r 2 + 36r + 6) C 6 .
3. Some inverse inequalities in Vh
In this paper, Sobolev spaces H s ( ), H s ( ) are defined in the standard way [23]. The norms are denoted by
k k H s ( ) , k k H s ( ) respectively. We recall that the well-known trace inequality and inverse trace inequality hold
for suitable Sobolev spaces in Rd . The norm in H s ( ), s 0, s = k + t, 0 < t < 1, integer k 0 reads:
X Z Z | u(x) u(y)|2
kuk2H s ( ) = kuk2H k ( ) +
dxdy.
(12)
|x y|d+2t
||=k
1

We will also use the space H 2 ( ), i.e, the dual space of H 2 ( ), with the norm
kk
H

1
2 ( )

sup

zH 2 ( )

h, zi
kzk 1

(13)

H 2 ( )

where the duality pairing is

Z
h, zi =
zds.

(14)

Theorem 3.1. Assuming a strictly positive definite RBF with Fourier transform (t)
(1 + ktk)ld , then for
g Vh and two real numbers 0 s < k, the following inequality holds
kgk H k ( ) Ch

2l3d
2

(15)

kgk H s ( )

where C is a constant independent of the density h.

Proof. Without being
P Nconfused, we will denote by C a generic constant independent of h throughout this paper.
Assuming that g = i=1
(kx xi k)i , by using the result in [24], we have
E 2
kgk2H 0 ( ) Ch 2l+2d kk
Furthermore
kgk2H k ( )

2
X



=
(kx xi k)i
i

H k ( )

!2

k(kx xi k)i k H k ( )

!2
max k(kx xi k)k2H k ( )

|i |

Pn
Pn
|ai |)2 n i=1
|ai |2 , we have
By using ( i=1
E k2
kgk2H k ( ) N max k(kx xi k)k2H k ( ) k
Ch

i
d

E k2 .
max k(kx xi k)k2H k ( ) k
i

This yields
kgk2H 0 ( ) Ch 2l+3d kgk2H k ( ) .
Then
kgk H k ( ) Ch

2l3d
2

kgk H s ( ) . 

70

Y. Duan / Computers and Mathematics with Applications 55 (2008) 6675

Remark 3.1. Unlike in FEM, the information about k, s is shown in the constant C. Actually, C depends on the
embedding constant from H s ( ) to H 0 ( ) and the quantity maxi k(kx xi k)k H k ( ) , which will be fixed whenever
the RBF is chosen. The well-known inverse inequality in a suitable finite element space reads [25]:
kgk H k ( ) Ch sk kgk H s ( ) .

(16)

The inverse inequality is worse than that in FEM. It has been shown that this is true. An obvious result is that
the condition number of a linear system arising in a meshless method using RBFs is worse. It has been verified
in computational experiments [12]. As applications, we will estimate those condition numbers by using inverse
inequalities in the next section. 
Theorem 3.2. Assuming that a strictly positive definite RBF, then for g Vh and two real numbers 0 s < k,
the following inequality holds
kgk H k ( ) Ch d G 1 (h)kgk H s ( )

(17)

where C is a constant independent of the density h.

PN
Proof. Assuming that g = i=1
(kx xi k)i , by using the Riemann sum, we have
Z
kgk2H 0 ( ) =
|g|2

Ch d

N
X

|g(xi )|2

i=1

E k2
= Ch d kA
where A is the interpolated matrix. As pointed out in Section 2, the eigenvalues of matrix A have lower bound G(h).
This yields
E k2 C G 2 (h)h d k
E k2 .
kA
Following the same procedure as in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we have
kgk H k ( ) Ch d G 1 (h)kgk H s ( ) .


1

In the case of s < 0, the most popular inverse inequality is about H 2 ( ) and H 2 ( ). In FEM, kgk
Chkgk

1
2 ( )

H 2 ( )

, for a suitable finite element space. Denote h = span{(x xi )}, {x1 , . . . , x N } is a set of distinct

centers on with density h 2 and is a strictly positive definite RBF, and we have

Theorem 3.3. Assuming that (t)

(1 + ktk)ld ; then for g h , the following inequality holds
kgk

H 2 ( )

Ch 2l3d+3
kgk
2

(18)

1
2 ( )

where C is a constant independent of the density h 2 .

Proof. We will denote by C, a generic constant independent of h 2 . According to the definition of kgk
have
kgk
H

1
2 ( )

sup

=
H

1
2 ( )\{0}

hg, gi

kgk 1
=

H 2 ( )
kgk2H 0 ( )

kgk

H 2 ( )

hg, i
kk 1

H 2 ( )

1
2 ( )

, we

Y. Duan / Computers and Mathematics with Applications 55 (2008) 6675

Assuming that g =
kgk2H 0 ( )

71

(kx xi k)i , then by using the technique in [24], we have

E k2
Ch 2l+2d2
k
2

Furthermore

2
X



kgk2H 1 ( ) =
(kx xi k)i
i

H 1 ( )

!2

k(kx xi k)i k H 1 ( )

!2
max k(kx
i

xi k)k2H 1 ( )

|i |

Pn
Pn
by using ( i=1
|ai |)2 n i=1
|ai |2 , we have
E 2
kgk2H 1 ( ) N max k(kx xi k)k2H 1 ( ) kk
i

E k2 .
Ch d+1
max k(kx xi k)k2H 1 ( ) k
2
i

This yields
kgk2H 0 ( ) Ch 2l+3d3
kgk2
2

H 2 ( )

Then
kgk

H 2 ( )

Ch 2l3d+3
kgk
2

1
2 ( )

Without loss of generality, we always assume that RBFs satisfy (t)

(1 + ktk)ld in the rest of this paper.
4. Applications
4.1. Condition number of the meshless collocation method
Consider the model problem:

Lu = f in
Bu = g on

(19)

where is a d-dimensional domain, with a smooth boundary , whose outer unit normal direction is denoted by
n, f is a given function of L 2 ( ),
X
X
i (ai j (x, y) j ) +
bi i + C0
(20)
L=
i, j

B = I,

or

+ Id
n L

is any linear elliptic operator. This means that:

X
> 0,
ai j i j k k2 , Rd .

(21)

(22)

i, j

Further, assume
P that the bilinear form induced by L, B is coercive and continuous.
Let u = i i (kx xi k); the collocation method reads:

Lu(xi ) = f (xi ) xi
Bu(x j ) = g(x j ) x j

(23)

72

Y. Duan / Computers and Mathematics with Applications 55 (2008) 6675

Denote by
A = [L(kxi x j k), B(kxi xk k)]T = [A1 , A2 ]T

(24)

the linear system induced by collocation using RBF is

E = [ fE, gE]T .
A

(25)

Theorem 4.1. Assume that matrix A is invertible. Then, the condition number Cond(A) has the following estimate:
Cond(A) Ch 2l3d+1

(26)

constant C depend on , , L, B.
Proof. For simplicity, we will denote by C a generic constant independent of h, which may depend on and operators
L, B.
E RN
0 6=
E T AT A
E =
E T A1 T A1
E +
E T A2 T A2
E

2
2
E k )k + kBu(x
E j )k
= kLu(x
P
where u = i i (kx xi k)
E k )k = 0, kBu(x
E k )k = 0, by using the invertibility of A, we have
(1) if kLu(x
Lu = 0;

Bu = 0

E=0
this implies that u = 0, then
(2)
E k )k2 + kBu(x
E j )k2
E T AT A
E = kLu(x

Ch d kLuk2L 2 ( ) + h d+1 kgk

2L 2 ( )
where g(x
k ) = Bu(xk ), xk ; in other words, g is the interpolant of Bu on . By using the estimate for elliptic
problems [26], we have
E T AT A
E Ch d kLuk2 2
+ Ch d+1 h 2l+3d3 kgk

2H 1 ( )
L ( )
Ch 2l+2d2 (kLuk2L 2 ( ) + kBuk2

H 2 ( )

Ch 2l+2d2 kuk2L 2 ( )
E k2 .
Ch 4l+4d2 k
On the other hand
E T AT A
E C1 h 2d k
E k2

where C1 = supx,y {|L(kx yk)|, |B(kx yk)|}. Therefore

cond(A) Ch 2l3d+1 .
C depends on , , L, B and the constant induced by the embedding.

4.2. Condition number of the meshless Galerkin method

Without loss of generality, consider the model problem:
(
u + u = f in
u
=g
on .
n

(27)

Y. Duan / Computers and Mathematics with Applications 55 (2008) 6675

By using Galerkins approximation, the corresponding linear system reads:

Z

E = fE,
A
A=
((x xi ) (x x j ) + (x xi )(x x j ))dx

73

(28)

fE =

Z

f (x)(x xi )dx +

g(x)(x xi )ds

T

(29)

Theorem 4.2. The condition number Cond(A) has the following estimate:
Cond(A) Ch 2l3d

(30)

constant C depend on , .
E R N , assuming that w =
Proof. For a given 0 6=

PN

i=1 i (x

xi ), we have

E 2.
E T A
E = kwk2 1
h 2l+2d kk

H ( )
On the other hand
E 2.
kwk2H 1 ( ) Ch d kk
This yields
Cond(A) Ch 2l3d . 
4.3. Others applications
It has been noted that the meshless Galerkin method cannot deal with Dirichlet problems directly. Lagrange
multipliers and the penalty method are usual and legitimate. Combining inverse inequalities with Lemma 2.1, we
can prove the following theorem in a similar way to traditional finite element analysis [2729].
Theorem 4.3. Let f H k ( ), k 0, g H s ( ), s 12 , and u is the solution of the original problem. Further,
let u h , h be the approximate solution of the RBF method with Lagrange multipliers. Assuming that the centers of
both and are quasi-uniform with density h 1 , h 2 respectively, h 1 h 2 2l3d+3 is sufficiently small. Then



3
u


ku u h k H 1 ( ) + h
C(h k+1 k f k H k ( ) + h s+ 2 kgk H s+1 ( ) )
(31)

1

n H 2 ( )
where h = max{h 1 , h 2 }, C = min{h 1 , h 2 }2l5d+6 .

Computational experiments [30] show that this method is successful to some extent. A key difficulty is that a smaller
density cannot result in higher accuracy. Anyway, inverse inequalities provide another possible way to circumvent the
BabuskaBrezzi condition to obtain stable scheme, like that in [31].
The Penalty method is an alternative way to deal with Dirichlet problems. It mainly consists of Lions
method [32],Babuskas method [19] and Nistches method [20]. According to Theorem 4.2, all of them will result
in higher condition numbers than before, which may depend linearly on the chosen penalty parameters. Applications
in the Domain decomposition method have been investigated in [24,3336]. It has been proven that the convergence
rate of traditional non-overlapping domain decompositions coupled with RBFs Galerkin methods will dramatically
depend on the density h [34]. It is a direct conclusion of the inverse inequalities stated in Section 3.
5. Conclusions
In this paper, we have proven several inverse inequalities in finite dimensional space spanned RBFs, at least strictly
definite RBFs, including multi-quadrics, Gaussian, Sobolev splines and CS-RBFs. Another possible way follows the
alternative definition of a Sobolev space using Fourier transforms, because we know more about the Fourier transforms
of RBFs. Estimates of condition numbers indicate that the meshless method using RBFs may be unstable. Fortunately,
the accuracy of meshless collocation is quite good. For example, Golberg and Chen [16] showed that the solution of

74

Y. Duan / Computers and Mathematics with Applications 55 (2008) 6675

a three dimensional Poisson equation could be obtined with only 60 randomly distributed knots to the same degree of
accuracy as for an FEM solution with 71,000 linear elements. In [3739], Kansa and Ling successfully circumvent the
ill-conditioned of system by using improved multi-quadrics and adaptive techniques. In [40,41], Li combines domain
decomposition with the meshless collocation method. In [24], Wu and Hon consider additive Schwarz approximations
to get an FEM-like condition number estimate by a suitable choice of RBFs. These favorablw works motivate further
in-depth research into meshless numerical methods using RBFs.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of the original manuscript and
for providing very valuable comments and suggestions. This work was supported by the Young Scholar Foundation
of UESTC under No. L08011001JX0646.
References
[1] M. Griebel, M.A. Schweitzer, A particle-partition of unity method for the solution of elliptic, parabolic and hyperbolic PDEs, SIAM J. Sci.
Comput. 22 (2000) 853890.
[2] I. Babuska, U. Banerjee, J.E. Osborn, Survey of meshless and generalized finite element methods: A unified approach, in: Acta. Numer,
Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp. 1125.
[3] T. Belytschko, Y. Krongauze, D. Organ, M. Fleming, P. Krysl, Meshless methods: An overview and recent developments, Comput. Methods.
Appl. Math. 139 (1996) 347 (special issue on Meshless Methods).
[4] E.J. Kansa, MultiquadricsA scattered data approximation scheme with applications to computational fluid dynamics, II. Solution to
parabolic, hyperbolic and elliptic partial differential equations, Comput. Math. Appl. 19 (1990) 147161.
[5] G.R. Liu, Mesh Free Methods: Moving Beyond the Finite Element Method, CRC Press, 2003.
[6] F.J. Narcowich, J.D. Ward, Scattered data interpolation on spheres: Error estimates and locally supported basis functions, SIAM J. Math.
Anal. 33 (2002) 13931410.
[7] R. Schaback, Error estimates and condition numbers for radial basis function interpolation, Adv. Comput. Math. 3 (1995) 251264.
[8] R. Schaback, Improved error bounds for scattered data interpolation by radial basis functions, Math. Comp. 68 (1999) 201216.
[9] H. Wendland, Error estimates for interpolation by compactly supported radial basis functions of minimal degree, J. Approx. Theory 93 (1998)
258272.
[10] H. Wendland, Scattered Data Approximation, Cambridge University Press, 2005.
[11] M.D. Buhmann, Radial Basis Functions: Theory and Implementations, Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[12] M.R. Dubal, Domain decomposition and local refinement for multiquadric approximation. I. Second order equations in one-dimension, Appl.
Sci. Comput. 1 (1994) 146171.
[13] G.E. Fasshauer, Solving differential equations with radial basis functions: Multilevel methods and smoothing, Adv. Comput. Math. 11 (1999)
139159.
[14] A.I. Fedoseyev, M.J. Friedman, E.J. Kansa, Improved multiquadric method for elliptic partial differential equations via PDE collocation on
the boundary. Radial basis functions and partial differential equations, Comput. Math. Appl 43 (2002) 439455.
[15] C. Franke, R. Schaback, Convergence order estimates of meshless collocation methods using radial basis functions, Adv. Comput. Math. 8
(1998) 381399.
[16] M.A. Golberg, C.S. Chen, S.R. Karur, Improved multiqudric approximation for partial differential equations, Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem. 18
(1996) 917.
[17] H. Wendland, Meshless Galerkin methods using radial basis functions, Math. Comp. 68 (1999) 15211531.
[18] Y.C. Hon, R. Schaback, On unsymmetric collocation by radial basis functions, Appl. Math. Comput. 119 (2001) 177186.
[19] I. Babuska, The finite element method with penalty, Math. Comp. 27 (1973) 221228.

[20] J.A. Nistche, Uber

ein Variationsprinzip zur Losung Dirichlet-Problemen bei Verwendung von Teilraumen, die keinen Randbedingungen
unteworfen sind, Abh. Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg 36 (1971) 915.
[21] H. Wendland, Sobolev-type error estimates for interpolation by radial basis functions, in: A. LeMehaute, C. Rabut, L.L. Schumaker (Eds.),
Surface Fitting and Multiresolution Methods, Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, 1997, pp. 337344.
[22] Z. Wu, Compactly supported positive definite radial functions, Adv. Comput. Math. 4 (1995) 283292.
[23] R.A. Adams, Sobolev Spaces, Academic Press, 1975.
[24] Y.C. Hon, Z. Wu, Additive schwarz domain decomposition with radial basis approximation, Int. J. Appl. Math. 4 (2000) 8198.
[25] P.G. Ciarlet, The Finite Element Method for Elliptic Problems, Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1978.
[26] P. Grisvard, Elliptic Problems in Nonsmooth Domains, Pitman, 1985.
[27] I. Babuska, The finite element method with Lagrange multipliers, Numer. Math. 20 (1973) 179192.
[28] F. Brezzi, On the existence,uniqueness and approximations of saddlepoint problems arising from Lagrange multipliers, RAIRO Anal. Num`er.
8 (1974) 129151.
[29] R. Stenberg, On some techniques for approximating boundary conditions in the finite element methods, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 63 (1995)
139148.

Y. Duan / Computers and Mathematics with Applications 55 (2008) 6675

75

[30] Y. Duan, Y.J. Tan, A meshless Galerkin method for Dirichlet problem using radial basis functions, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 196 (2006)
394401.
[31] H.J.C. Barbosa, T.J.R. Hughes, Boundary Lagrange multipliers in finite element methods: Error analysis in natural norms, Numer. Math. 62
(1992) 115.
[32] J.L. Lions, Probl`emes aux limites non homog`enes a` donees irreguli`eres: Une methode dapproximation, in: Numerical Analysis of Partial
Differential Equations (C.I.M.E.2 Ciclo, Ispra, 1967), Edizioni Cremonese, Rome, 1968, pp. 283292.
[33] R.K. Beatson, W.A. Light, S. Billings, Fast solution of the radial basis function interpolation equations: Domain decomposition methods,
SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 22 (2000) 17171740.
[34] Y. Duan, Y.J. Tan, Meshless Galerkin method based on regions partitioned into subdomains using global RBF, in: Proceedings of ICNAAM
2004, Wiley-VCH, 2004, pp. 128133.
[35] L. Ling, E.J. Kansa, Preconditioning for radial basis functions with domain decomposition methods, Math. Comput. Modelling 40 (2004)
14131427.
[36] L. Ling, Y.C. Hon, Improved numerical solver for Kansas method based on affine space decomposition, Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem. 29 (2005)
10771085.
[37] E.J. Kansa, Y.C. Hon, Circumventing the Ill-conditioning problem with multiquadric radial basis functions: Applications for elliptic partial
differential equations, Comput. Math. Appl. 39 (2000) 123137.
[38] L. Ling, R. Opfer, R. Schaback, Results on meshless collocation techniques, Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem. 30 (2006) 247253.
[39] L. Ling, E.J. Kansa, A least squares preconditioner for radial basis functions collocation methods, Adv. Comput. Math. 23 (2005) 3154.
[40] J. Li, Y.C. Hon, Domain decomposition for radial basis meshless methods, Numer. Methods Partial Differential Equations 20 (2004) 450462.
[41] X. Zhou, Y.C. Hon, Jichun Li, Overlapping domain decomposition method by radial basis functions, Appl. Numer. Math. 44 (2003) 241255.