On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> Matthew Knepley <[email protected]> writes: > > I think we can differentiate between mathematical background and > analysis, > > e.g. > > > > Proving that GMRES converges with these matrices, etc. > > > > and showing exactly how to structure an algorithm: > > > > Saad and Schultz, 96 > > *86*, but what about GCR? After all, GMRES is an incremental > I'm getting too old. > modification of GCR. It also contains mispredictions like: > I would argue that Saad's implementation suggestions (like incremental QR) are much better than the GCR and justify an independent citation. > > "In practical implementation it is usually more suitable to replace > the Gram-Schmidt algorithm of step 2 by the modified Gram-Schmidt > algorithm" > > If someone uses LGMRES, would we produce a citation only to Baker et al, > Only to Baker. This should be easy since SS would be associated with GMRES. > or also to Saad & Schultz? What about the BiCG family, containing many > more variants that are slight variations on existing methods? Or > We need to build in support for selection with options I think. > identical methods that were published twice under different names? > Cite both. Matt -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener
