From: raphael couturier Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2014 08:47:41 +0000 (+0100) Subject: modif X-Git-Url: https://bilbo.iut-bm.univ-fcomte.fr/and/gitweb/Krylov_multi.git/commitdiff_plain/6251e0820998d25ac24e3bf9f79423fac3cb8b11?ds=inline modif --- diff --git a/Revision.tex b/Revision.tex index 4b4ffe3..0ccf1a3 100644 --- a/Revision.tex +++ b/Revision.tex @@ -85,6 +85,6 @@ Section 4 has been rewritten in order to explain our choice to compare our Krylo \item ``Was the method of reference [9] implemented by the authors of [9]? How did they do against GMRES?'' \medskip -As explained in the paper, authors of [9] have not implemented the method of reference [9]. They have mainly focused on the convergence analysis of various forms of the algorithm [9] and presented results of numerical examples on a sequential computer. +As explained in the paper, authors of [9] have not implemented the method of reference [9]. They have mainly focused on the convergence analysis of various forms of the algorithm [9] and presented simulations of numerical examples on a sequential computer. \end{enumerate} \end{document} diff --git a/krylov_multi_reviewed.tex b/krylov_multi_reviewed.tex index 1334172..0ad524f 100644 --- a/krylov_multi_reviewed.tex +++ b/krylov_multi_reviewed.tex @@ -367,7 +367,8 @@ We have performed some experiments on an infiniband cluster of three Intel Xeon \label{fig:002} \end{figure} -The experiments are performed on 3 different clusters of cores interconnected by an infiniband network (each cluster is a quad-core CPU). Figures~\ref{fig:001} and~\ref{fig:002} show the scalability performances of GMRES, classical multisplitting and Krylov multisplitting methods: strong and weak scaling are presented respectively. We can remark from these figures that the performances of our Krylov multisplitting method are better than those of GMRES and classical multisplitting methods. In the experiments conducted in this work, our method is about twice faster than the GMRES method and about 9 times faster than the classical multisplitting method. Our multisplitting method uses a minimization step over a Krylov subspace which reduces the number of iterations and accelerates the convergence. We can also remark that the performances of the classical block Jacobi multisplitting method are the worst compared with those of the other two methods. This is why in the following experiments we compare the performances of our Krylov multisplitting method with only those of the GMRES method. +%%The experiments are performed on 3 different clusters of cores interconnected by an infiniband network (each cluster is a quad-core CPU). +Figures~\ref{fig:001} and~\ref{fig:002} show the scalability performances of GMRES, classical multisplitting and Krylov multisplitting methods: strong and weak scaling are presented respectively. We can remark from these figures that the performances of our Krylov multisplitting method are better than those of GMRES and classical multisplitting methods. In the experiments conducted in this work, our method is about twice faster than the GMRES method and about 9 times faster than the classical multisplitting method. Our multisplitting method uses a minimization step over a Krylov subspace which reduces the number of iterations and accelerates the convergence. We can also remark that the performances of the classical block Jacobi multisplitting method are the worst compared with those of the other two methods. This is why in the following experiments we compare the performances of our Krylov multisplitting method with only those of the GMRES method. %%%******************************** %%%********************************