You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
However, in the case of FourierSeries fields, the partial derivatives are not implemented correctly for even derivatives: in particular, the Nyquist frequency is not handled correctly. See Algorithm 1 here for more info on this regard.
Any other kind of implementation seems to work worse. One could use the identity
and implement the RHS using Algorithm 4, which corresponds to the heterog_laplacian operator of jaxdf. This also seems to reduce accuracy, although the accuracy of heterog_laplacian has not been tested yet.
This calls for further investigation.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Following the CBS paper, it may be enough to add the PML as a generic absorption term, without having to split the derivative operators and the Laplacian! This would save quite a bit of FFTs.
While testing the accuracy of this, it would be nice to start looking for both speed and error using basil
The Helmholtz operator needs to evaluate the following differential operator internally
with the caveat that the differential operators need to be modified to account for the PML
At the moment, this is done by modifying the equation as
(see this).
However, in the case of
FourierSeries
fields, the partial derivatives are not implemented correctly for even derivatives: in particular, the Nyquist frequency is not handled correctly. See Algorithm 1 here for more info on this regard.Any other kind of implementation seems to work worse. One could use the identity
and implement the RHS using Algorithm 4, which corresponds to the
heterog_laplacian
operator ofjaxdf
. This also seems to reduce accuracy, although the accuracy ofheterog_laplacian
has not been tested yet.This calls for further investigation.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: