On the computational efficiency of isogeometric methods for smooth elliptic problems using direct solvers

SUMMARY We compare the computational efficiency of isogeometric Galerkin and collocation methods for partial differential equations in the asymptotic regime. We define a metric to identify when numerical experiments have reached this regime. We then apply these ideas to analyze the performance of different isogeometric discretizations, which encompass C0 finite element spaces and higher-continuous spaces. We derive convergence and cost estimates in terms of the total number of degrees of freedom and then perform an asymptotic numerical comparison of the efficiency of these methods applied to an elliptic problem. These estimates are derived assuming that the underlying solution is smooth, the full Gauss quadrature is used in each non-zero knot span and the numerical solution of the discrete system is found using a direct multi-frontal solver. We conclude that under the assumptions detailed in this paper, higher-continuous basis functions provide marginal benefits. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  T. Hughes,et al.  Efficient quadrature for NURBS-based isogeometric analysis , 2010 .

[2]  Gene H. Golub,et al.  Matrix computations (3rd ed.) , 1996 .

[3]  Alessandro Reali,et al.  Isogeometric collocation: Cost comparison with Galerkin methods and extension to adaptive hierarchical NURBS discretizations , 2013 .

[4]  Iain S. Duff,et al.  The Multifrontal Solution of Unsymmetric Sets of Linear Equations , 1984 .

[5]  T. Hughes,et al.  ISOGEOMETRIC COLLOCATION METHODS , 2010 .

[6]  Victor M. Calo,et al.  The Cost of Continuity: Performance of Iterative Solvers on Isogeometric Finite Elements , 2012, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[7]  Leszek Demkowicz,et al.  Toward a universal h-p adaptive finite element strategy , 1989 .

[8]  T. Hughes,et al.  A Simple Algorithm for Obtaining Nearly Optimal Quadrature Rules for NURBS-based Isogeometric Analysis , 2012 .

[9]  Patrick Amestoy,et al.  A Fully Asynchronous Multifrontal Solver Using Distributed Dynamic Scheduling , 2001, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl..

[10]  Rainald Löhner,et al.  Improved error and work estimates for high‐order elements , 2013 .

[11]  Timothy A. Davis,et al.  Algorithm 832: UMFPACK V4.3---an unsymmetric-pattern multifrontal method , 2004, TOMS.

[12]  T. Hughes,et al.  ISOGEOMETRIC ANALYSIS: APPROXIMATION, STABILITY AND ERROR ESTIMATES FOR h-REFINED MESHES , 2006 .

[13]  John K. Reid,et al.  The Multifrontal Solution of Indefinite Sparse Symmetric Linear , 1983, TOMS.

[14]  J. Oden,et al.  Toward a universal h - p adaptive finite element strategy: Part 2 , 1989 .

[15]  William Gropp,et al.  Efficient Management of Parallelism in Object-Oriented Numerical Software Libraries , 1997, SciTools.

[16]  Lisandro Dalcin,et al.  PetIGA: High-Performance Isogeometric Analysis , 2013, ArXiv.

[17]  A. George.  Nested Dissection of a Regular Finite Element Mesh , 1973 .

[18]  Jed Brown,et al.  Efficient Nonlinear Solvers for Nodal High-Order Finite Elements in 3D , 2010, J. Sci. Comput..

[19]  Eric Jones,et al.  SciPy: Open Source Scientific Tools for Python , 2001 .

[20]  Samuel Williams,et al.  Roofline: an insightful visual performance model for multicore architectures , 2009, CACM.

[21]  Patrick Amestoy,et al.  Hybrid scheduling for the parallel solution of linear systems , 2006, Parallel Comput..

[22]  Victor M. Calo,et al.  The cost of continuity: A study of the performance of isogeometric finite elements using direct solvers , 2012 .

[23]  Leszek Demkowicz,et al.  Toward a universal adaptive finite element strategy part 3. design of meshes , 1989 .