ライブラリ登録: Guest
Begell Digital Portal Begellデジタルライブラリー 電子書籍 ジャーナル 参考文献と会報 リサーチ集
International Journal for Multiscale Computational Engineering
インパクトファクター: 1.016 5年インパクトファクター: 1.194 SJR: 0.554 SNIP: 0.82 CiteScore™: 2

ISSN 印刷: 1543-1649
ISSN オンライン: 1940-4352

International Journal for Multiscale Computational Engineering

DOI: 10.1615/IntJMultCompEng.2015014280
pages 1-23

SPARSE GENERALIZED MULTISCALE FINITE ELEMENT METHODS AND THEIR APPLICATIONS

Eric T. Chung
Department of Mathematics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR, China
Yalchin Efendiev
Department of Mathematics and Institute for Scientific Computation (ISC), Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840, USA; Multiscale Model Reduction Laboratory, North-Eastern Federal University, Yakutsk, Russia, 677980
Wing Tat Leung
Department of Mathematics and Institute for Scientific Computation (ISC), Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-3368, USA
Guanglian Li
Department of Mathematics & Institute for Scientific Computation (ISC), Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA; Institute for Numerical Simulation, The University of Bonn, Wegelerstrasse 6,53115 Bonn, Germany

要約

In a number of previous papers, local (coarse grid) multiscale model reduction techniques are developed using a Generalized Multiscale Finite Element Method. In these approaches, multiscale basis functions are constructed using local snapshot spaces, where a snapshot space is a large space that represents the solution behavior in a coarse block. In a number of applications (e.g., those discussed in the paper), one may have a sparsity in the snapshot space for an appropriate choice of a snapshot space. More precisely, the solution may only involve a portion of the snapshot space. In this case, one can use sparsity techniques to identify multiscale basis functions. In this paper, we consider two such sparse local multiscale model reduction approaches. In the first approach (which is used for parameter-dependent multiscale PDEs), we use local minimization techniques, such as sparse POD, to identify multiscale basis functions, which are sparse in the snapshot space. These minimization techniques use l1 minimization to find local multiscale basis functions, which are further used for finding the solution. In the second approach (which is used for the Helmholtz equation), we directly apply l1 minimization techniques to solve the underlying PDEs. This approach is more expensive as it involves a large snapshot space; however, in this example, we cannot identify a local minimization principle, such as local generalized SVD. All our numerical results assume the sparsity and we discuss this assumption for the snapshot spaces. Moreover, we discuss the computational savings provided by our approach. The sparse solution allows a fast evaluation of stiffness matrices and downscaling the solution to the fine grid since the reduced dimensional solution representation is sparse in terms of local snapshot vectors. Numerical results are presented, which show the convergence of the proposed method and the sparsity of the solution.


Articles with similar content:

A COMPARISON BETWEEN GLOBAL AND LOCALIZED RBF MESHLESS METHODS FOR PROBLEMS INVOLVING CONVECTIVE HEAT TRANSFER
ICHMT DIGITAL LIBRARY ONLINE, Vol.0, 2015, issue
Jiajia Waters, Darrell W. Pepper
KERNEL-BASED STOCHASTIC COLLOCATION FOR THE RANDOM TWO-PHASE NAVIER-STOKES EQUATIONS
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification, Vol.9, 2019, issue 5
Peter Zaspel, M. Griebel, C. Rieger
A GRADIENT-BASED SAMPLING APPROACH FOR DIMENSION REDUCTION OF PARTIAL DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH STOCHASTIC COEFFICIENTS
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification, Vol.5, 2015, issue 1
Miroslav Stoyanov, Clayton G. Webster
TIME AND FREQUENCY DOMAIN METHODS FOR BASIS SELECTION IN RANDOM LINEAR DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification, Vol.8, 2018, issue 6
John D. Jakeman, Roland Pulch
AN OPTIMAL SAMPLING RULE FOR NONINTRUSIVE POLYNOMIAL CHAOS EXPANSIONS OF EXPENSIVE MODELS
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification, Vol.5, 2015, issue 3
Michael Sinsbeck, Wolfgang Nowak