[petsc-dev] How does this compare...

[Hong Zhang]

Entire paper discusses SpAMM, and compares with SGEMM.
Sorry, I do not see anything about SpMV.
Hong

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:52 PM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Hong Zhang <hzhang at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
>> Matt:
>>
>>> to the new scalable MatMatMult() that is done in PETSc? Is it possible
>>> to even compare
>>> the flop rates sensibly?
>>>
>>>   http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.1692
>>>
>> "An Optimized Sparse Approximate Matrix Multiply"
>> computes  Approximate matrix product for matrices with decay
>>                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>     ^^^^^^^^^^
>> It is for special application in chemistry(?),
>> not applicable for general sparse matrix product.
>> No comparison can be drawn to petsc's C=A*B.
>>
>
> This is the wrong conclusion. What he does is sparsify the result, so he is
> computing SOME sort of sparse matrix-vector product. The question is:
>
>    Does his SpMV use the same algorithm as PETSc?
>
> That is why I asked.
>
>     Matt
>
>
>> Hong
>>
>>>
>>> This is what Jeff is planning on using in his SciDAC.
>>>
>>>       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
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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/20120328/1fbeaa58/attachment.html>