Numerical Comparison of Two-Body Regularizations

We numerically compare four schemes to regularize a three-dimensional two-body problem under perturbations: the Sperling-Bürdet (S-B), Kustaanheimo-Stiefel (K-S), and Bürdet-Ferrandiz (B-F) regularizations, and a three-dimensional extension of the Levi-Civita (L-C) regularization we developed recently. As for the integration time of the equation of motion, the least time is needed for the unregularized treatment, followed by the K-S, the extended L-C, the B-F, and the S-B regularizations. However, these differences become significantly smaller when the time to evaluate perturbations becomes dominant. As for the integration error after one close encounter, the K-S and the extended L-C regularizations are tied for the least error, followed by the S-B, the B-F, and finally the unregularized scheme for unperturbed orbits with eccentricity less than 2. This order is not changed significantly by various kinds of perturbations. As for the integration error of elliptical orbits after multiple orbital periods, the situation remains the same except for the rank of the S-B scheme, which varies from the best to the second worst depending on the length of integration and/or on the nature of perturbations. Also, we confirm that Kepler energy scaling enhances the performance of the unregularized, K-S, and extended L-C schemes. As a result, the K-S and the extended L-C regularizations with Kepler energy scaling provide the best cost performance in integrating almost all the perturbed two-body problems.