[petsc-dev] How do you get RIchardson?

[Peter Brune]

Here's a pretty reasonable paper calling this method "Steepest Descent" and
using it like we intend to use it.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.4426

- Peter

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 18:58, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I am sure it does (Jed's bastard usage notwithstanding), however I could
>>> be fine with
>>> Richardson as long as the documentation clearly notes that this is
>>> Picard's method.
>>>
>>
>> http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=picard+newton
>>
>> http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=picard+solver
>>
>> Which of these use your "standard" definition of "Picard"?
>>
>
> Water Resources is your standard for mathematical terminology?
>
>     Matt
>
> --
> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their
> experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their
> experiments lead.
> -- Norbert Wiener
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20110916/0e3f3f41/attachment.html>