> > Anyway, why do you insist in using ARPACK when SLEPc's Krylov-Schur work? > ARPACK will not give you any further advantage.
I thought ARPACK was faster when the system size is large and number of eigenvalues required is small. I will be working with sparse matrices of size ~60,000. Does SLEPC's Krylov-Schur have about the same performance as ARPACK for calculating ~50 eigenvalues for such matrices? On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Jose E. Roman <[email protected]> wrote: > > El 25/03/2015, a las 21:47, Harshad Sahasrabudhe escribió: > > > With MUMPS you should not get spurious eigenvalues. > > I get only a few spurious eigenvalues when using MUMPS with ARPACK, but > the eigenvectors are definitely wrong. > > > > Did you try the krylovschur solver? > > Yes, Krylov-Schur gives me correct results. > > > > How do you know the eigenvalues are wrong? > > I'm testing my implementation of Schrodinger equation solver with a 3D > harmonic oscillator potential. I'm getting correct results using FEAST and > krylovschur solvers. > > > > Are you setting problem type to GHEP? > > Yes > > > > Did you try the arpack-ng version? Seems that some people have taken over > maintainance. > > Anyway, why do you insist in using ARPACK when SLEPc's Krylov-Schur work? > ARPACK will not give you any further advantage. > > Jose > >
