Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add Rk3Pareschi IMEX time stepper #5760

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 29, 2024

Conversation

wthrowe
Copy link
Member

@wthrowe wthrowe commented Feb 13, 2024

Note to @yoonso0-0: I've renamed the class since the last version I gave you.

Proposed changes

Upgrade instructions

Code review checklist

  • The code is documented and the documentation renders correctly. Run
    make doc to generate the documentation locally into BUILD_DIR/docs/html.
    Then open index.html.
  • The code follows the stylistic and code quality guidelines listed in the
    code review guide.
  • The PR lists upgrade instructions and is labeled bugfix or
    new feature if appropriate.

Further comments

//
// Not given in the reference. Any set of coefficients of the form
// (0, 0, x, x, 1 - 2 x) works.
{0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's probably better to use a non-zero value of x so the error estimate samples the y-values across the interval. x=1/4 looks good. Using only the last value is probably not robust. This is the reason, by the way, that Dormand-Prince is 853 and not, say 87 or 86. These 'simpler' error estimates turned out not to sample the interval very well.

Copy link
Member

@nilsdeppe nilsdeppe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, one small question that might be a typo. Please squash and rebase immediately :)

namespace TimeSteppers {
/*!
* \ingroup TimeSteppersGroup
* \brief A fourth-order Runge-Kutta method with IMEX support.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

fourth -> third?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yep. Fixed.

@nilsdeppe
Copy link
Member

CI failure is unrelated.

@nilsdeppe nilsdeppe merged commit 9e1711a into sxs-collaboration:develop Feb 29, 2024
21 of 22 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants