
arXiv: 1206.2948
handle: 11336/8633 , 20.500.11937/51388 , 10754/555666
In this paper we study how the use of a more continuous set of basis functions affects the cost of solving systems of linear equations resulting from a discretized Galerkin weak form. Specifically, we compare performance of linear solvers when discretizing using $C^0$ B-splines, which span traditional finite element spaces, and $C^{p-1}$ B-splines, which represent maximum continuity. We provide theoretical estimates for the increase in cost of the matrix-vector product as well as for the construction and application of black-box preconditioners. We accompany these estimates with numerical results and study their sensitivity to various grid parameters such as element size $h$ and polynomial order of approximation $p$. Finally, we present timing results for a range of preconditioning options for the Laplace problem. We conclude that the matrix-vector product operation is at most $\slfrac{33p^2}{8}$ times more expensive for the more continuous space, although for moderately low $p$, this number is significantly reduced. Moreover, if static condensation is not employed, this number further reduces to at most a value of 8, even for high $p$. Preconditioning options can be up to $p^3$ times more expensive to setup, although this difference significantly decreases for some popular preconditioners such as Incomplete LU factorization.
Performance, Numerical Analysis (math.NA), 510, 620, isogeometric analysis, Iterative Solvers, Isogeometric Analysis, https://purl.org/becyt/ford/2.3, FOS: Mathematics, Mathematics - Numerical Analysis, https://purl.org/becyt/ford/2, iterative solvers, performance
Performance, Numerical Analysis (math.NA), 510, 620, isogeometric analysis, Iterative Solvers, Isogeometric Analysis, https://purl.org/becyt/ford/2.3, FOS: Mathematics, Mathematics - Numerical Analysis, https://purl.org/becyt/ford/2, iterative solvers, performance
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 69 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
