pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.09213 · v1 · pith:BB42QN6Rnew · submitted 2019-07-22 · 🧮 math.NA · cs.NA

Numerical analysis of a projection-based stabilized POD-ROM for incompressible flows

Samuele Rubino This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 18:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.NA cs.NA
keywords POD-ROMincompressible flowslocal projection stabilizationNavier-Stokes equationsreduced order modelingerror estimatesinf-sup conditionstabilized methods
0
0 comments X

The pith

A new local projection stabilized POD-ROM for incompressible flows circumvents the discrete inf-sup condition and permits non-divergence-free velocity modes.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper proposes a projection-based stabilized proper orthogonal decomposition reduced order model for incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. The stabilization draws from local projection stabilization techniques in finite elements to create a velocity-pressure ROM. It removes the requirement that the POD velocity and pressure spaces satisfy the discrete inf-sup condition. Velocity modes are allowed to be neither strongly nor weakly divergence-free, enabling use of snapshots from stabilized full-order methods. Error estimates are derived for the fully discrete problem, and numerical tests on flow past a cylinder demonstrate the approach.

Core claim

The central discovery is a velocity-pressure POD-ROM stabilized by local projection terms that avoids the inf-sup condition on the reduced spaces and allows non-divergence-free snapshots, with rigorous error bounds proven for the Navier-Stokes discretization.

What carries the argument

The local projection stabilization (LPS) terms added to the reduced system, which project fluctuations onto a coarse space to stabilize the velocity-pressure coupling.

If this is right

  • The ROM can compute reduced pressure for quantities like drag and lift forces.
  • Error estimates cover the fully Navier-Stokes discretized case.
  • Snapshots from penalty or projection-based stabilized methods can be used directly.
  • Numerical accuracy is verified on two-dimensional laminar unsteady flow past a circular obstacle.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • This stabilization might extend to other reduced order modeling contexts beyond POD, such as dynamic mode decomposition.
  • Applications in three-dimensional or turbulent flows could benefit from reduced computational demands without custom snapshot selection.
  • Further analysis might explore optimal parameter choices for the stabilization terms in the reduced setting.

Load-bearing premise

That the local projection stabilization terms transfer effectively from the finite element context to the POD-ROM setting without introducing new instabilities or requiring additional conditions on the reduced spaces.

What would settle it

Numerical simulations where the LPS-ROM exhibits instability or fails to converge when velocity modes are not divergence-free and the inf-sup condition is violated would disprove the effectiveness of the stabilization transfer.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.09213 by Samuele Rubino.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Computational grid. with Um = u(0, H/2, t) = 1.5 m/s, and H = 0.41 m the channel height. At the outlet, we perform a comparison using on one side outflow (do nothing) boundary conditions (ν∇u − p Id)n = 0, with n the outward normal to the domain, for which we can remove the penalty term with factor σ to the variational formulation, since the constant the pres￾sure is determined up through the formulation i… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Final FOM solution: velocity magnitude, pressure and vorticity (3D plot) from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Final FOM solution: velocity magnitude, pressure and vorticity (3D plot) from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Temporal evolution of drag coefficient, lift coefficient, kinetic energy and “weak [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: First POD velocity modes (Euclidean norm): do nothing BC at the outlet. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: First POD velocity modes (Euclidean norm): Dirichlet BC at the outlet. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: First POD pressure modes: do nothing BC at the outlet. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: First POD pressure modes: Dirichlet BC at the outlet. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: POD velocity-pressure eigenvalues (top) and captured system’s velocity-pressure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Discrete inf-sup constant (top) and saturation constant (bottom) for POD [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Temporal evolution of quantities of interest computed with LPS-ROM ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Temporal evolution of quantities of interest computed with LPS-ROM ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Temporal evolution of discrete L 2 relative error of LPS-ROM velocity and pressure (r = 3, 5, 7) with respect to LPS-FOM ones with do nothing BC at the outlet. 41 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Temporal evolution of discrete L 2 relative error of LPS-ROM velocity and pressure (r = 3, 5, 7) with respect to LPS-FOM ones with Dirichlet BC at the outlet. 42 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Discrete ` 2 (L 2 ) relative error of LPS-ROM velocity and pressure with respect to L 2 -projected LPS-FOM ones (on the POD spaces) with do nothing and Dirichlet BC at the outlet in terms of Λr = PMv i=r+1 λi and Zr = PMp i=r+1 γi , respectively. 43 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p043_15.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this paper, we propose a new stabilized projection-based POD-ROM for the numerical simulation of incompressible flows. The new method draws inspiration from successful numerical stabilization techniques used in the context of Finite Element (FE) methods, such as Local Projection Stabilization (LPS). In particular, the new LPS-ROM is a velocity-pressure ROM that uses pressure modes as well to compute the reduced order pressure, needed for instance in the computation of relevant quantities, such as drag and lift forces on bodies in the flow. The new LPS-ROM circumvents the standard discrete inf-sup condition for the POD velocity-pressure spaces, whose fulfillment can be rather expensive in realistic applications in Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). Also, the velocity modes does not have to be neither strongly nor weakly divergence-free, which allows to use snapshots generated for instance with penalty or projection-based stabilized methods. The numerical analysis of the fully Navier-Stokes discretization for the new LPS-ROM is presented, by mainly deriving the corresponding error estimates. Numerical studies are performed to discuss the accuracy and performance of the new LPS-ROM on a two-dimensional laminar unsteady flow past a circular obstacle.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a new projection-based stabilized POD reduced-order model (ROM) for the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations, inspired by local projection stabilization (LPS) techniques from finite-element methods. The LPS-ROM is a velocity-pressure formulation that circumvents the discrete inf-sup condition on the POD spaces and permits velocity modes that are neither strongly nor weakly divergence-free. Error estimates are derived for the fully discrete Navier-Stokes scheme, and numerical experiments are presented for two-dimensional laminar unsteady flow past a circular cylinder.

Significance. If the error analysis is valid, the work enables more flexible snapshot generation (e.g., from penalty or stabilized FE methods) and avoids the computational cost of enforcing inf-sup stability or divergence-free constraints on the reduced spaces. The derivation of a priori error estimates for the stabilized ROM constitutes a clear theoretical contribution.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the sentence 'the velocity modes does not have to be neither strongly nor weakly divergence-free' contains a grammatical error and should be rephrased for clarity.
  2. The precise definition of the fluctuation operator and the LPS terms when restricted to the POD spaces should be stated explicitly (e.g., in the section introducing the ROM formulation) to facilitate verification of the adaptation from the FE setting.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive summary of our manuscript, the recognition of its theoretical contribution, and the recommendation for minor revision. No specific major comments were raised in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper adapts standard LPS stabilization arguments from the finite-element setting to derive error estimates for the new POD-ROM, explicitly allowing non-divergence-free modes and bypassing the discrete inf-sup condition via the added stabilization terms on velocity and pressure fluctuations. No step reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, self-definition, or load-bearing self-citation chain; the central claims rest on independent adaptation of existing analysis techniques without renaming known results or smuggling ansatzes. The derivation is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract, no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable; the work relies on standard POD and FE stabilization concepts.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5715 in / 933 out tokens · 31172 ms · 2026-05-24T18:09:05.452230+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Ahmed, T

    N. Ahmed, T. Chac´ on Rebollo, V. John, and S. Rubino. Analysis of a full space- time discretization of the Navier–Stokes equations by a local projection stabilization method. IMA J. Numer. Anal. , 37(3):1437–1467, 2017

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    Ahmed, T

    N. Ahmed, T. Chac´ on Rebollo, V. John, and S. Rubino. A review of variational mul- tiscale methods for the simulation of turbulent incompressible flows. Arch. Comput. Methods Engrg., 24:115–164, 2017. 26

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Ahmed and S

    N. Ahmed and S. Rubino. Numerical comparisons of finite element stabilized methods for a 2D vortex dynamics simulation at high Reynolds number. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 349:191–212, 2019

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Streamline derivative projection-based POD-ROM for convection-dominated flows. Part I : Numerical Analysis

    M. Aza¨ ıez, T. Chac´ on Rebollo, and S. Rubino. Streamline derivative projection- based POD-ROM for convection-dominated flows. Part I : Numerical Analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.09780v1, 2017

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  5. [5]

    A cure for instabilities due to advection-dominance in POD solution to advection-diffusion-reaction equations

    M. Aza¨ ıez, T. Chac´ on Rebollo, and S. Rubino. A cure for instabilities due to advection-dominance in POD solution to advection-diffusion-reaction equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.05614v1, 2019

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1907

  6. [6]

    Baiges, R

    J. Baiges, R. Codina, and S. Idelsohn. Explicit reduced-order models for the stabilized finite element approximation of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. Internat. J. Numer. Methods Fluids , 72(12):1219–1243, 2013

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Ballarin, A

    F. Ballarin, A. Manzoni, A. Quarteroni, and G. Rozza. Supremizer stabilization of POD-Galerkin approximation of parametrized steady incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. Internat. J. Numer. Methods Engrg. , 102(5):1136–1161, 2015

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    Bergmann, C.-H

    M. Bergmann, C.-H. Bruneau, and A. Iollo. Enablers for robust POD models. J. Comput. Phys., 228(2):516–538, 2009

    work page 2009

  9. [9]

    H. Brezis. Functional analysis, Sobolev spaces and partial differential equations . Uni- versitext. Springer, New York, 2011

    work page 2011

  10. [10]

    Burkardt, M

    J. Burkardt, M. Gunzburger, and H.-C. Lee. POD and CVT-based reduced-order modeling of Navier-Stokes flows. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 196(1-3):337– 355, 2006

    work page 2006

  11. [11]

    Caiazzo, T

    A. Caiazzo, T. Iliescu, V. John, and S. Schyschlowa. A numerical investigation of velocity-pressure reduced order models for incompressible flows. J. Comput. Phys. , 259:598–616, 2014

    work page 2014

  12. [12]

    F. E. Cellier. Continuous system modeling . Springer-Verlag, New York, 1991

    work page 1991

  13. [13]

    Chac´ on Rebollo and A

    T. Chac´ on Rebollo and A. Dom´ ınguez Delgado. A unified analysis of mixed and stabilized finite element solutions of Navier-Stokes equations. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 182(3-4):301–331, 2000. IV WCCM (Buenos Aires, 1998)

    work page 2000

  14. [14]

    Chac´ on Rebollo, M

    T. Chac´ on Rebollo, M. G´ omez M´ armol, V. Girault, and I. S´ anchez Mu˜ noz. A high order term-by-term stabilization solver for incompressible flow problems. IMA J. Numer. Anal., 33(3):974–1007, 2013

    work page 2013

  15. [15]

    Chac´ on Rebollo, M

    T. Chac´ on Rebollo, M. G´ omez M´ armol, and S. Rubino. Numerical analysis of a finite element projection-based VMS turbulence model with wall laws. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 285:379–405, 2015

    work page 2015

  16. [16]

    Chac´ on Rebollo and R

    T. Chac´ on Rebollo and R. Lewandowski.Mathematical and numerical foundations of turbulence models and applications. Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Technology. Birkh¨ auser/Springer, New York, 2014

    work page 2014

  17. [17]

    P. G. Ciarlet. The finite element method for elliptic problems , volume 40 of Classics in Applied Mathematics . SIAM, 2002. 27

    work page 2002

  18. [18]

    R. Codina. Stabilized finite element approximation of transient incompressible flows using orthogonal subscales. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. , 191(39-40):4295– 4321, 2002

    work page 2002

  19. [19]

    Codina and J

    R. Codina and J. Blasco. Analysis of a stabilized finite element approximation of the transient convection-diffusion-reaction equation using orthogonal subscales. Comput. Vis. Sci., 4(3):167–174, 2002

    work page 2002

  20. [20]

    An Artificial Compression Reduced Order Model

    V. DeCaria, T. Iliescu, W. Layton, M. McLaughlin, and M. Schneier. An artificial compression reduced order model. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.09061v1, 2019

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1902

  21. [21]

    Galletti, C

    B. Galletti, C. H. Bruneau, L. Zannetti, and A. Iollo. Low-order modelling of laminar flow regimes past a confined square cylinder. J. Fluid Mech. , 503:161–170, 2004

    work page 2004

  22. [22]

    Giere, T

    S. Giere, T. Iliescu, V. John, and D. Wells. SUPG reduced order models for convection-dominated convection-diffusion-reaction equations. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 289:454–474, 2015

    work page 2015

  23. [23]

    F. Hecht. New development in freefem++. J. Numer. Math. , 20(3-4):251–265, 2012

    work page 2012

  24. [24]

    Holmes, J

    P. Holmes, J. L. Lumley, and G. Berkooz. Turbulence, coherent structures, dynamical systems and symmetry. Cambridge Monographs on Mechanics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996

    work page 1996

  25. [25]

    Iliescu and Z

    T. Iliescu and Z. Wang. Variational multiscale proper orthogonal decomposition: Navier-Stokes equations. Numer. Methods Partial Differential Equations , 30(2):641– 663, 2014

    work page 2014

  26. [26]

    V. John. Reference values for drag and lift of a two-dimensional time-dependent flow around a cylinder. Internat. J. Numer. Methods Fluids , 44:777–788, 2004

    work page 2004

  27. [27]

    John and G

    V. John and G. Matthies. Higher-order finite element discretizations in a benchmark problem for incompressible flows. Internat. J. Numer. Methods Fluids , 37:885–903, 2001

    work page 2001

  28. [28]

    Kalashnikova and M

    I. Kalashnikova and M. F. Barone. Efficient non-linear proper orthogonal decompo- sition/Galerkin reduced order models with stable penalty enforcement of boundary conditions. Internat. J. Numer. Methods Engrg. , 90(11):1337–1362, 2012

    work page 2012

  29. [29]

    Kunisch and S

    K. Kunisch and S. Volkwein. Galerkin proper orthogonal decomposition methods for parabolic problems. Numer. Math., 90(1):117–148, 2001

    work page 2001

  30. [30]

    W. Layton. Introduction to the numerical analysis of incompressible viscous flows , volume 6 of Computational Science & Engineering. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA, 2008

    work page 2008

  31. [31]

    D. J. Lucia and P. S. Beran. Projection methods for reduced order models of com- pressible flows. J. Comput. Phys. , 188(1):252–280, 2003

    work page 2003

  32. [32]

    Z. Luo, J. Chen, I. M. Navon, and X. Yang. Mixed finite element formulation and error estimates based on proper orthogonal decomposition for the nonstationary Navier- Stokes equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. , 47(1):1–19, 2008/09. 28

    work page 2008

  33. [33]

    Mohebujjaman, L

    M. Mohebujjaman, L. G. Rebholz, X. Xie, and T. Iliescu. Energy balance and mass conservation in reduced order models of fluid flows. J. Comput. Phys. , 346:262–277, 2017

    work page 2017

  34. [34]

    B. R. Noack, P. Papas, and P. A. Monkewitz. The need for a pressure-term repre- sentation in empirical Galerkin models of incompressible shear flows. J. Fluid Mech., 523:339–365, 2005

    work page 2005

  35. [35]

    L. G. Rebholz and M. Xiao. Improved accuracy in algebraic splitting methods for Navier-Stokes equations. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. , 39(4):A1489–A1513, 2017

    work page 2017

  36. [36]

    S. Rubino. A streamline derivative POD-ROM for advection-diffusion-reaction equa- tions. In SMAI 2017— 8e Biennale Fran¸ caise des Math´ ematiques Appliqu´ ees et In- dustrielles, volume 64 of ESAIM Proc. Surveys , pages 121–136. EDP Sci., Les Ulis, 2018

    work page 2017

  37. [37]

    Sch¨ afer and S

    M. Sch¨ afer and S. Turek. Benchmark computations of laminar flow around a cylin- der. In E. H. Hirschel, editor, Flow Simulation with High-Performance Computers II , volume 48 of Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics , pages 547–566. Vieweg, 1996

    work page 1996

  38. [38]

    R. L. Scott and S. Zhang. Finite element interpolation of non-smooth functions satisfying boundary conditions. Math. Comp., 54(190):483–493, 1990

    work page 1990

  39. [39]

    Stabile and G

    G. Stabile and G. Rozza. Finite volume POD-Galerkin stabilised reduced order meth- ods for the parametrised incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. Comput. & Fluids , 173:273–284, 2018

    work page 2018

  40. [40]

    Z. Wang, I. Akhtar, J. Borggaard, and T. Iliescu. Proper orthogonal decomposition closure models for turbulent flows: a numerical comparison. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 237/240:10–26, 2012

    work page 2012

  41. [41]

    weak- strong

    X. Xie, M. Mohebujjaman, L. G. Rebholz, and T. Iliescu. Data-driven filtered reduced order modeling of fluid flows. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. , 40(3):B834–B857, 2018. 29 Figure 2: Final FOM solution: velocity magnitude, pressure and vorticity (3D plot) from top to bottom with do nothing BC at the outlet. 30 Figure 3: Final FOM solution: velocity magnitude, pressu...

    work page 2018