On 15/01/14 09:07, Colin Cotter wrote:
I didn't read this but it might be interesting: http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.3301
It's a little hard to tell, but they seem to have reinvented the local matrix approach (e.g. Markall, et al 2013, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fld.3648/full) and then built a slightly smarter version that does some kind of block-wise insertion (to better utilise cache? it's unclear). The numbers they report indicate that their optimised versions go faster than the unoptimised ones. There's no analysis of whether that is actually fast. Also, results only for P1, "Pk is exactly the same", except that it's not (e.g. Cantwell, Sherwin, Kirby, Kelly 2011, From h to p efficiently: Strategy selection for operator evaluation on hexahedral and tetrahedral elements). Lawrence