Cea's Lemma and Finite Element Error Estimates
Let be a continuous, coercive bilinear form on : and . Let be the exact solution of for all , and the Galerkin approximation. Then: The Galerkin solution is a quasi-best approximation: its error is within a factor of the best approximation from .
Proof
Galerkin orthogonality. By definition, and for all . Subtracting: for all . The error is -orthogonal to .
Error estimate. For any : by coercivity. Write where :
The second term vanishes by Galerkin orthogonality. For the first:
Combining: . Dividing by :
Since this holds for all , take the infimum: .
Consequences
For P1 elements on a quasi-uniform triangulation with mesh size : the best approximation error from satisfies (by the Bramble-Hilbert lemma and interpolation estimates). Cea's lemma then gives . For the error, the Aubin-Nitsche duality argument gains one additional order: .
The constant (the "condition number" of the bilinear form) is sharp in general. For symmetric positive definite , the Galerkin solution is the true best approximation in the energy norm , and . For non-symmetric or indefinite problems, the inf-sup (Babuska-Brezzi) condition replaces coercivity, and the analog of Cea's lemma involves the inf-sup constant instead of .
While Cea's lemma gives an a priori bound (requiring knowledge of ), practical computation uses a posteriori error estimators computed from . The residual-based estimator (element residual + jump terms) satisfies , providing both lower and upper bounds for adaptive mesh refinement.