Jiahao Chen posted in #18 <https://github.com/JuliaLang/ODE.jl/issues/18>that he could mentor for this project.If Steven G. Johnson won't be mentoring the project.
On Saturday, March 15, 2014 12:23:52 AM UTC+5:30, Kongne gael stephanie wrote: > > please who is the mentor for Native Julia solvers for ODEs? > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:25 PM, Jiahao Chen <[email protected]<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> Hi Niluka and Kongne, >> >> ODE.jl already implements two Runge-Kutta based methods (ode23 and >> ode45). I don't think we really need more Runge-Kutta algorithms, >> although someone who has worked on ODE.jl recently should feel free to >> correct me. >> >> If you want to _show_ us implementations of a simple textbook >> algorithm like RK4 as part of your application to demonstrate that you >> know something about ODE solvers and Julia's syntax, that's fine, but >> it's unlikely that we will actually incorporate textbook code into the ODE >> package. >> >> Kongne, if your question is about writing solvers for first-order ODEs >> or second-order ODEs, consider that in principle, an ODE solver for >> first-order ODEs will suffice to solve ODEs of any order, since you >> can always rewrite higher order ODEs as vectorized first-order ODEs. >> For example, y'' = -y can be rewritten as the coupled system [y; z]' = >> [z; -y]. This is quite a common trick used to reduce the order of >> ODEs. >> >> We can continue the discussion of ideas for specific projects in the GSoC >> issue: >> >> https://github.com/JuliaLang/ODE.jl/issues/18 >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jiahao Chen >> Staff Research Scientist >> MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Kongne gael stephanie >> <[email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: >> > what i mean is,am writing an algorithm to solve only first order or >> second >> > order? >> > >> > On Thursday, March 13, 2014 9:28:05 PM UTC+1, Stefan Karpinski wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Kongne gael stephanie >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> i wish to know if i use only first order or second order to implement >> >> >> >> >> >> Sorry, I don't understand. Could you elaborate? >> > >
