Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

EQP #173

Merged
merged 59 commits into from
Nov 12, 2024
Merged

EQP #173

merged 59 commits into from
Nov 12, 2024

Conversation

dylan-copeland
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

…umbers of snapshots (resulting from conditions for the first snapshot). Eliminating RHS basis in EQP case. Refactoring the EQP setup.
@chldkdtn
Copy link
Collaborator

Is it ready for review and merge?

@dylan-copeland
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Is it ready for review and merge?

@chldkdtn it is working in some cases, but I am planning to test more simulations and possibly fix some issues for parallel tests.

@chldkdtn
Copy link
Collaborator

@dylan-copeland Let's keep in mind that we need regression tests for EQP.

@siuwuncheung siuwuncheung self-requested a review September 4, 2024 19:27
@dylan-copeland dylan-copeland added ready-for-review Ready for review and removed WIP labels Sep 6, 2024
rom/laghos_rom.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rom/laghos_rom.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rom/laghos.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rom/laghos_eqp.cpp Show resolved Hide resolved
rom/laghos.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rom/laghos.cpp Outdated
@@ -1310,7 +1349,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
for (int curr_window = numWindows-1; curr_window >= 0; --curr_window)
basis[curr_window]->writePDweights(pd2_tdof, curr_window);
}
if (!romOptions.hyperreduce_prep)
if (romOptions.hyperreduce)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If I remember correctly, we intentionally leave the option of online ROM via Galerkin projection but NOT using hyper-reduction, which I believe is because we want to see the fact that hyper-reduction is needed for speed-up. But we ended up having these strange conditions !romOptions.hyperreduce_prep. Should we get rid of this consideration from now on?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@dylan-copeland dylan-copeland Oct 29, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This change looks like a mistake. It has nothing to do with this PR. I will revert this change, see b648ac1. You still have a valid question, which I think should be addressed outside this PR.

rom/laghos.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@cval26 cval26 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Dylan, just to make sure the changes made during the review process did not break anything, I suggest that you run a representative simulation before merging, to check that you get the same accuracy results.

@dylan-copeland dylan-copeland merged commit 58e426d into rom Nov 12, 2024
@dylan-copeland dylan-copeland deleted the rom-eqp branch November 12, 2024 01:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ready-for-review Ready for review
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants