[petsc-dev] PetscCitations: software or underlying math

[Matthew Knepley]

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

> Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> writes:
> > I would argue that Saad's implementation suggestions (like incremental
> > QR) are much better than the GCR and justify an independent citation.
>
> The real difference is that GCR keeps two sets of vectors.  It does not
> have any "brute-force QR".  But GCR allows nonlinear preconditioners and
> provides the true residual at each iteration at no extra cost.  These
> weaknesses were not pointed out in the 1986 GMRES paper.  The 1993
> FGMRES paper did not cite the GCR paper, though it has pretty much the
> same attributes, minus GCR's ability to produce the true residual.


I consider this level of dissection overkill.


> >>   "In practical implementation it is usually more suitable to replace
> >>   the Gram-Schmidt algorithm of step 2 by the modified Gram-Schmidt
> >>   algorithm"
> >>
> >> If someone uses LGMRES, would we produce a citation only to Baker et al,
> >>
> >
> > Only to Baker. This should be easy since SS would be associated with
> GMRES.
>
> What about CG with the single reduction or with Bill's trick?  Does that
> tweak mean that Hestenes and Stiefel don't get cited, where as they
> would be otherwise?
>

I would cite H&S.


> Who gets cited for PCFIELDSPLIT?


I think no one. Breaking stuff into pieces is simply too elementary. If we
can attach options
to citations, we could possible cite things.


> >> or also to Saad & Schultz?  What about the BiCG family, containing many
> >> more variants that are slight variations on existing methods?  Or
> >>
> >
> > We need to build in support for selection with options I think.
>
> Okay, to do this, we need to extend the interface to include one or more
> classification labels.  Should those labels be extensible (dynamically
> registered) or static (enum)?
>

Do you have to ask?

   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/20131024/080660de/attachment.html>