On Friday, December 1, 2017 at 2:50:38 PM UTC+1, Timo Heister wrote: > > > They're always going to be there because we keep constrained nodes in > the > > linear system. > > If we modify the way ConstraintMatrix operates, we could work around > this though: >
but there is really no need, is it? If you start with initial vector (or subspace, depending on the method) orthogonal to the constraints, you ain't gonna find converge to those eigenvalues anyway. Cheers, Denis > 1. Without rescaling those equations (as we do inside ConstraintMatrix > right now) the spurious EV would all be equal to 1 and so ignoring > them is easier. > 2. One could also zero out the constrained rows after the fact. > 3. Did we rip out the support for removing the constrained entries > from the matrix completely? > > -- > Timo Heister > http://www.math.clemson.edu/~heister/ > -- The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/ For mailing list/forum options, see https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "deal.II User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
