Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 64 references

Efficient low-order refined preconditioners for high-order matrix-free continuous and discontinuous Galerkin methods

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper constructs a matrix-free preconditioner whose condition number stays bounded as mesh size, polynomial degree, and DG penalty vary.

desk verdict Solid, honest paper on matrix-free high-order preconditioning, but the headline p-robustness rests on an explicit unproved assumption about the local ILU-smoothed V-cycle. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.07071 v2 pith:77CBG24Z submitted 2019-08-19 math.NA cs.NA

Will Pazner This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.NAcs.NA MSC 65N3065N5565F0865N35
keywords matrix-freepreconditioninghigh-orderfiniteelementsdiscontinuousGalerkinadditiveSchwarzFEM-SEMequivalencegeometricmultigridILUsmoothinginteriorpenalty
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Solving high-order finite element and discontinuous Galerkin systems usually costs too much memory if the system matrix is assembled, since the number of nonzeros grows like $O(p^{2d})$ in dimension $d$ and polynomial degree $p$. This paper constructs a preconditioner that avoids forming the high-order matrix: it replaces the degree-$p$ operator by a low-order ($p=1$) operator on a mesh refined at Gauss-Lobatto points, which is equivalent in energy with constants independent of $h$ and $p$, and solves that sparse problem with an overlapping additive Schwarz method whose local solvers are geometric multigrid V-cycles with ordered ILU smoothing. The central claim is that the condition number of the preconditioned system stays bounded as the mesh size $h$, the polynomial degree $p$, and (for interior penalty and BR2 discontinuous Galerkin methods) the penalty parameter $\eta$ vary. A sympathetic reader would care because bounded condition numbers mean a bounded number of conjugate gradient iterations, so the solve time scales like the matrix-free operator application and the memory cost is linear in the number of degrees of freedom.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the low-order refined operator $K_h$: a $p=1$ finite element stiffness matrix on the mesh obtained by subdividing each high-order element into parallelepipeds whose vertices are adjacent Gauss-Lobatto nodes. FEM-SEM equivalence (Proposition 2) makes $K_h$ spectrally equivalent to the high-order $K_p$, so a uniform solver for $K_h$ is a uniform preconditioner for $K_p$. The solver is the additive Schwarz preconditioner $B=\sum_j R_j Q_j$ from (13), with one coarse space and one subspace per overlapping vertex patch; the local $R_j$ are geometric multigrid V-cycles on the structured Gauss-Lobatto hierarchy using minimum-discarded-fill ordered ILU(0) smoothing, which plays the role of line relaxation on unstructured meshes. Lemma 2 is the key technical step: it bounds the energy of the interpolated partition-of-unity pieces by $h^{-2}\|w\|_{L^2}^2 + |w|_{H^1}^2$ with constants independent of element aspect ratio, which is what lets the Schwarz theory survive the $O(p)$ anisotropy. For DG, the machinery is the decomposition $V_{DG} = V_B + V_p$, with a point Jacobi solve on the bubble space $V_B$ and the conforming additive Schwarz solver on $V_p$; norm equivalence of IP and BR2 (Proposition 3) transfers the bound.

What would settle it

Fix a $2\times2$ coarse mesh with constant coefficient and a single patch covering the whole domain, then run the proposed preconditioner on the Poisson problem at $p=40, 80, 160$ and count conjugate gradient iterations to a fixed residual reduction, say $10^{-8}$. If the count grows without bound as $p$ increases, the uniform condition number bound of Corollary 1 is false, since the only unproved ingredient is the uniform local-solver assumption (17). Equivalently, compute the extreme eigenvalues of $R_j A_j$ on one patch and check whether they stay within fixed bounds as $p$ grows.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes two uniform bounds. For continuous Galerkin, Corollary 1 asserts that the additive Schwarz preconditioner $B$ defined by (13) satisfies $\kappa(B A_p) \le C$ with $C$ independent of $h$ and $p$, where $A_p$ is the high-order stiffness operator. For discontinuous Galerkin, Corollary 2 asserts $\kappa(B_{DG} A_{BR2}) \le C$ independent of $h$, $p$, and the penalty $\eta$, and Theorem 2 gives the same for the interior penalty form. The argument chains three ingredients: FEM-SEM spectral equivalence between $K_p$ and the low-order refined $K_h$; a Schwarz space decomposition whose stability is proved in Lemma 2 despite the non-shape-regular refined mesh; and uniform local solvers whose uniformity is assumed in (17) and verified numerically.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the assumption that the local approximate solve on each overlapping patch is uniformly accurate as the mesh is refined and the polynomial degree grows; the paper demonstrates this by experiment, but does not prove it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For continuous Galerkin, a bounded $\kappa(BA_p)$ means the number of conjugate gradient iterations is bounded as $h\to 0$ and $p\to\infty$, so total solve time is $O(p\,n_{\rm dof})$ with $O(n_{\rm dof})$ memory.
  • For interior penalty and BR2 discontinuous Galerkin methods, the same boundedness holds as the penalty $\eta$ grows, so the stabilization parameter can be chosen for accuracy rather than solver convenience.
  • The low-order refined matrices are sparse with a constant number of nonzeros per row, independent of $p$, which is what makes forming them cheap in time and memory.
  • The vertex-patch additive Schwarz version parallelizes the local solves, with iteration counts roughly 1.5 to 2 times the single-patch case in the reported tables.
  • Numerical tests on variable coefficients, curved unstructured meshes, and anisotropic element strips show the same bounded iteration counts, provided subdomain overlap is made isotropic on anisotropic meshes as described in Section 4.5.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial extension: the unproved uniformity assumption on the ILU-smoothed multigrid V-cycle, equation (17), is the only step separating the theorem from a fully rigorous $h$-$p$ bound; replacing ILU with exact line solves on the structured patches, or proving a smoothing property for MDF-ordered ILU, would close the gap.
  • Editorial extension: Lemma 2 needs only isotropic overlap, not shape regularity, so the same additive Schwarz construction should apply to hp-adaptive meshes, boundary-layer meshes, and other anisotropic refinements beyond Gauss-Lobatto grids.
  • Editorial extension: because the preconditioner never sees the high-order matrix entries, it is natural to test it on high-contrast variable coefficients and on vector-valued systems such as elasticity or Maxwell equations, where the scalar Schwarz theory does not directly apply.
  • Editorial extension: the paper's cost model assumes one geometric multigrid V-cycle per patch; on massively parallel hardware, the overlap factor and coarse-solve communication could change the practical balance, so a distributed-memory implementation study would test whether the bounded iteration count translates to bounded wall-clock time.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper designs and analyzes a matrix-free preconditioner for high-order continuous and discontinuous Galerkin discretizations of elliptic problems. The method is based on the FEM-SEM equivalence: a high-order operator is preconditioned by a low-order (p=1) finite element operator on a refined mesh of Gauss-Lobatto points. The resulting anisotropic low-order system is solved by an overlapping additive Schwarz method with vertex patches, using an element-structured geometric multigrid V-cycle with ordered ILU(0) smoothing as local solvers. The analysis proves stability of the Schwarz decomposition on the p-anisotropic mesh (Lemma 2) and derives a condition-number bound (Theorem 1) that is uniform in h and p conditional on assumption (17), namely that each local solver R_j is a uniform preconditioner for its subspace operator. The method is extended to interior-penalty and BR2 DG discretizations, where a norm-equivalence argument yields a bound independent of the penalty parameter (Proposition 3 and Corollary 2). Extensive numerical experiments on Cartesian, unstructured, variable-coefficient, and anisotropic meshes, as well as DG penalty studies and timing scalings, support the practical claims.

Significance. If the local-solver uniformity in (17) holds, the paper delivers a practical, matrix-free solver achieving bounded iteration counts under h- and p-refinement and under DG penalty variation, with near-optimal setup and application costs. The analysis of the Schwarz decomposition on p-anisotropic meshes in Lemma 2 is a genuine technical contribution, and the DG norm-equivalence argument in Proposition 3 is clean. The numerical study is unusually thorough for a solver paper, covering many of the regimes that matter in practice. The main caveat is that the key uniformity of the ILU-smoothed multigrid local solver is assumed rather than proved; this is the single load-bearing assumption on which the headline robustness claims rest.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.2, Eq. (17); Theorem 1; Corollary 1] The p-robust bound κ(BA_p) ≤ C in Corollary 1 is obtained from Theorem 1 together with the FEM-SEM equivalence, but Theorem 1 is conditional on assumption (17): each local solver R_j must satisfy C0 a(u_j,u_j) ≤ a(R_j A_j u_j, u_j) ≤ C1 a(u_j,u_j) with C0, C1 independent of h and p. The manuscript explicitly says in Section 3.2 that 'we will assume that R_j is a uniform preconditioner for A_j' and provides no proof of this for the specific element-structured V-cycle with MDF-ordered ILU(0) smoothing developed in Sections 3.3 and 3.4. This gap is load-bearing because Section 3.4 itself shows that uniformity is not generic: AMD-ordered ILU degrades while MDF/RCM orderings do not, so the property is not a consequence of the general Schwarz framework. Consequently, Corollary 1 as stated overclaims an unconditional bound for the implemented preconditioner; it should either be accompanied by a proof of (17) or be reworded to present the bound as conditional on a numerically verified property.
  2. [Section 3.5; Theorem 2; Corollary 2] The DG result κ(B_DG A_BR2) ≤ C in Corollary 2 inherits the same unproved assumption. Theorem 2 requires R_p to be a uniform approximation to A_p^{-1}, and the paper establishes this hypothesis only through Theorem 1, which itself rests on (17). Therefore the claimed robustness with respect to h, p, and the penalty parameter η is conditional on the same local-solver uniformity. If (17) fails in some parameter regime, the DG corollary and the associated robustness claims would also fail. The author should make this conditional structure explicit in the statements of the DG results.
  3. [Section 4.1; Table 3] The numerical evidence offered in support of (17) is supportive but not conclusive. In the vertex-patch tests on the 32×32 mesh, the CG iteration count increases from 26 at p=2 to 38 at p=20, a growth of about 46%. Moreover, at p=2 the iteration count grows steadily under h-refinement (4, 10, 14, 20, 26 for nx=2 through 32). The paper characterizes these trends as pre-asymptotic, but the data are also consistent with slow, unbounded growth of the condition number. If the author intends the headline claims to be unconditional, then a proof of (17) or at least a much more extensive empirical study (larger p, direct condition-number estimates, and a study of the dependence on aspect ratio) is needed. Otherwise, the wording should state explicitly that the observed robustness is an empirical finding rather than a proven uniform bound.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section 5] The abstract and conclusions state that the preconditioner is 'robust in h and p' and 'robust in the penalty parameter' without qualification. These statements should be aligned with the conditional nature of Theorem 1 and Corollaries 1-2, for example by adding a clause such as 'assuming the local solvers are uniform preconditioners, which is verified numerically.'
  2. [Table 3 and Section 4.1] In the vertex-patch column of Table 3, the p=2 row shows a monotonic increase in iteration counts with h-refinement (4, 10, 14, 20, 26 for nx=2 to 32). Even if this is a pre-asymptotic effect, the author should comment on whether the growth persists at larger nx and how it interacts with the claimed h-robustness of the parallel version.
  3. [Lemma 2 and Remark 2] The symbol h is used both for the coarse-mesh spacing (in Lemma 2 and the product-rule bound) and for the refined-mesh element size (in Remark 2). A brief sentence distinguishing these two uses, e.g., h for the coarse mesh and ~h/p for the refined mesh, would improve readability.
  4. [Proof of Lemma 2] The step in which Ih is said to be bounded on Q2([0,1]^d) in the H^1_i seminorms is stated as 'it is clear'; a short justification with the explicit constant c_I (for instance by a direct calculation on the reference cube) would make the proof more self-contained.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the p-robustness claim is a conditional theorem resting on an explicitly stated uniformity assumption for local solvers, with independent FEM-SEM equivalence and Schwarz theory carrying the argument.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are derived rather than assumed. Theorem 1 explicitly assumes that each local solver R_j is a uniform preconditioner (Eq. 17) and then proves the Schwarz decomposition bounds; Corollary 1 combines that conditional result with the external FEM-SEM spectral equivalence result (Proposition 2). The uniformity of the local ILU-smoothed multigrid solver is not proven in the paper, but it is also not a fitted parameter or a disguised restatement of the global conclusion. It is an explicit hypothesis whose numerical verification is reported in Section 4. If that hypothesis fails for some p or aspect ratio, Corollary 1 would be false for the implemented solver, but that is a correctness risk, not circularity. The DG extension is imported from an independent external result (Theorem 2, citing Antonietti et al.), and the BR2 norm-equivalence proof is self-contained using trace inequalities. Self-citations to the author's earlier tensor-product preconditioners appear only as background and are not load-bearing. No equation is defined in terms of its own output, and no fitted constant is relabeled as a prediction. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No parameters are fitted to data and no new physical or mathematical entities are postulated. The method rests on standard external equivalence theorems plus one unproved assumption: uniform local solvers (Eq. 17), which is backed only by numerical experiments. The affine-mesh restriction is another domain assumption that numerical examples partially test.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math FEM-SEM spectral equivalence (Propositions 1-2): high-order and low-order Gauss-Lobatto refined stiffness matrices are spectrally equivalent with constants independent of h and p.
    External results from Canuto [18] and Canuto et al. [23]; used to transfer the preconditioner to the high-order system in Corollary 1.
  • standard math Bramble-Xu bounds for L2 projection onto coarse space V0 (Eq. 22): |u0|_H1 ≲ |uh|_H1 and ||uh-u0||_L2 ≲ h |uh|_H1.
    Cited from [12]; used in the stable decomposition in Theorem 1.
  • standard math Trace and inverse trace inequalities for DG spaces, Lemma 4 from [17] (Eqs 32-33).
    Used to prove equivalence of IP and BR2 norms in Proposition 3.
  • ad hoc to paper Uniformity of local approximate solvers R_j, Eq (17): constants C0, C1 independent of h and p satisfy C0 a(u_j,u_j) <= a(R_j A_j u_j, u_j) <= C1 a(u_j,u_j).
    Assumed in Theorem 1; not proven for the geometric multigrid V-cycle with ordered ILU smoothing, only numerically demonstrated in Section 3.4.
  • domain assumption Uniform coarse solver R0 for coarse space V0, assumed via BoomerAMG.
    Standard scalable AMG assumption; plausible for a low-order coarse mesh and used throughout the numerical experiments.
  • domain assumption Affine coarse mesh for FEM-SEM equivalence in Section 3.1; curved elements are tested but not analyzed.
    The text states 'for simplicity of exposition, we assume in this section to be affine' (Section 3.1). Non-affine isoparametric elements are tested in Section 4.4 without proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Efficient low-order refined preconditioners for high-order matrix-free continuous and discontinuous Galerkin methods." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/77CBG24Z

@misc{pith2026190807071,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Efficient low-order refined preconditioners for high-order matrix-free continuous and discontinuous Galerkin methods},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/77CBG24Z}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.07071}
}
abstract

In this paper, we design preconditioners for the matrix-free solution of high-order continuous and discontinuous Galerkin discretizations of elliptic problems based on FEM-SEM equivalence and additive Schwarz methods. The high-order operators are applied without forming the system matrix, making use of sum factorization for efficient evaluation. The system is preconditioned using a spectrally equivalent low-order ($p=1$) finite element operator discretization on a refined mesh. The low-order refined mesh is anisotropic and not shape regular in the polynomial degree of the high-order operator, requiring specialized solvers to treat the anisotropy. We make use of an element-structured, geometric multigrid V-cycle with ordered ILU(0) smoothing. The preconditioner is parallelized through an overlapping additive Schwarz method that is robust in $h$ and $p$. The method is extended to interior penalty and BR2 discontinuous Galerkin discretizations, for which it is also robust in the size of the penalty parameter. Numerical results are presented on a variety of examples, verifying the uniformity of the preconditioner.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.07071 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Multigrid-preconditioned conjugate gradient iteration counts (residual reduction of 1012) for a Poisson problem on a Cartesian grid. The grids are obtained by refining a 2 × 2 Cartesian grid using either uniform or Gauss-Lobatto refinement. Remark 5. The components described above can also be used to construct a simple two-grid scheme, using V1 +· · ·+VJ as a smoother and V0 as a coarse solver. Furthermore, the mult… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Line and ILU smoothing: multigrid-preconditioned conjugate gradient iteration counts (residual reduction of 1012) for a Poisson problem on a Cartesian grid. The grids are obtained by refining a 2 × 2 Cartesian grid using Gauss-Lobatto refinement. powerful smoother such as Gauss-Seidel can improve performance, however the iteration counts are no longer robust in the refinement level. A common method for addressing th… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Two multigrid iterations with different smoothers applied to 2×2 Cartesian grid with Gauss-Lobatto refinement and random initial error [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Wall-clock run times in 2D and 3D under uniform h-refinement using fixed polynomial degree p = 8. 4 6 8 10 12 16 20 10−3 10−2 10−1 100 O(p 2) O(p 3) Polynomial degree p Wall-clock time (s) Run time under p-refinement (2D) Setup Solve Total 4 6 8 10 12 16 20 10−2 10−1 1…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Wall-clock run times in 2D and 3D under p-refinement using a fixed Cartesian mesh. 4.3. Discontinuous Galerkin methods. To test the performance of the additive Schwarz preconditioner BDG applied to interior penalty and BR2 discontinuous Galerkin discretizations, we aga…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Unstructured quadrilateral meshes used for the numerical experiments. −1 0 1 −1 0 1 b1(x, y) 0 1500 3000 4500 6000 7500 9000 −1 0 1 −1 0 1 b2(x, y) 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 −1 0 1 −1 0 1 b3(x, y) 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Variable coefficients bi(x, y) used for the examples in Section 4.2. report the iterations required to converge in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Example of mesh used for the anisotropic test case, showing elements (high￾lighted in red) with an aspect ratio of 15. solver remain constant with respect to the aspect ratio. Slight increases in iteration counts are observed for higher polynomial degrees and increased…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Convergence on a sequence of meshes with anisotropic elements, showing number of conjugate gradient iterations required to reduce the residual by a factor of 108 . B(n) indicates additive Schwarz with n subdomains, B(V) indicates additive Schwarz with vertex patches wi…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Adams, M

    M. Adams, M. Brezina, J. Hu, and R. Tuminaro , Parallel multigrid smoothing: polynomial versus Gauss-Seidel, Journal of Computational Physics, 188 (2003), pp. 593–610, https://doi.org/10.1016/ s0021-9991(03)00194-3, https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fs0021-9991%2803%2900194-3

    work page 2003

  2. [2]

    P. R. Amestoy, T. A. Davis, and I. S. Duff , An approximate minimum degree ordering algorithm, SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, 17 (1996), pp. 886–905, https://doi.org/10. 1137/s0895479894278952, https://doi.org/10.1137%2Fs0895479894278952

    work page 1996

  3. [3]

    Anderson, A

    R. Anderson, A. Barker, J. Bramwell, J.-S. Camier, J. Cerveny, V. Dobrev, Y. Du- douit, A. Fisher, T. Kolev, W. Pazner, M. Stowell, V. Tomov, J. Dahm, D. Medina, and S. Zampini , MFEM: a modular finite element library . 2019

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    P. F. Antonietti and P. Houston , A class of domain decomposition preconditioners for hp-discontinuous Galerkin finite element methods , Journal of Scientific Computing, 46 (2010), pp. 124–149, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10915-010-9390-1 , https://doi.org/10.1007% 2Fs10915-010-9390-1

    doi:10.1007/s10915-010-9390-1 2010

  5. [5]

    P. F. Antonietti, M. Sarti, and M. Verani , Multigrid algorithms for hp-discontinuous Galerkin discretizations of elliptic problems, SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 53 (2015), pp. 598–618,https: //doi.org/10.1137/130947015, https://doi.org/10.1137%2F130947015

    work page doi:10.1137/130947015 2015

  6. [6]

    P. F. Antonietti, M. Sarti, M. Verani, and L. T. Zikatanov , A uniform additive Schwarz preconditioner for high-order discontinuous Galerkin approximations of elliptic problems, Journal of Sci- entific Computing, 70 (2016), pp. 608–630, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10915-016-0259-9 , https: //doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10915-016-0259-9

    doi:10.1007/s10915-016-0259-9 2016

  7. [7]

    D. N. Arnold , An interior penalty finite element method with discontinuous elements , SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 19 (1982), pp. 742–760, https://doi.org/10.1137/0719052, https://doi. org/10.1137%2F0719052

    doi:10.1137/0719052 1982

  8. [8]

    D. N. Arnold, F. Brezzi, B. Cockburn, and L. D. Marini , Unified analysis of discontinuous Galerkin methods for elliptic problems , SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 39 (2002), pp. 1749–1779, https://doi.org/10.1137/s0036142901384162, https://doi.org/10.1137%2Fs0036142901384162

    doi:10.1137/s0036142901384162 2002

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    T. M. Austin, M. Brezina, B. Jamroz, C. Jhurani, T. A. Manteuffel, and J. Ruge , Semi- automatic sparse preconditioners for high-order finite element methods on non-uniform meshes , Journal of Computational Physics, 231 (2012), pp. 4694–4708, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2012....

    2012 doi

  2. [10]

    Bassi, S

    F. Bassi, S. Rebay, M. Savini, G. Mariotti, and S. Pedinotti , A high-order accurate discontin- uous finite element method for inviscid and viscous turbomachinery flow , in Proceedings of the Second European Conference on Turbomachinery Fluid Dynamics and Thermodynamics, R. Decu...

    1997

  3. [11]

    P. D. Bello-Maldonado and P. F. Fischer , Scalable low-order finite element preconditioners for high-order spectral element poisson solvers , SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 41 (2019), pp. S2– S18, https://doi.org/10.1137/18m1194997, https://doi.org/10.1137%2F18m1194997

    2019 doi

  4. [12]

    J. H. Bramble and J. Xu , Some estimates for a weighted L2 projection, Mathematics of Com- putation, 56 (1991), pp. 463–463, https://doi.org/10.1090/s0025-5718-1991-1066830-3 , https: //doi.org/10.1090%2Fs0025-5718-1991-1066830-3

    1991 doi

  5. [13]

    Brezzi, G

    F. Brezzi, G. Manzini, D. Marini, P. Pietra, and A. Russo , Discontinuous Galerkin approxima- tions for elliptic problems , Numerical Methods for Partial Differential Equations, 16 (2000), pp. 365– 378, https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2426(200007)16:4<365::aid-num2>3.0.co;2-y , ht...

    2000 doi

  6. [14]

    K. Brix, C. Canuto, and W. Dahmen , Nested dyadic grids associated with Legendre-Gauss- Lobatto grids , Numerische Mathematik, 131 (2014), pp. 205–239, https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00211-014-0691-4 , https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00211-014-0691-4

    2014

  7. [15]

    Brown , Efficient nonlinear solvers for nodal high-order finite elements in 3D , Journal of Sci- entific Computing, 45 (2010), pp

    J. Brown , Efficient nonlinear solvers for nodal high-order finite elements in 3D , Journal of Sci- entific Computing, 45 (2010), pp. 48–63, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10915-010-9396-8 , https: //doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10915-010-9396-8

    2010 doi

  8. [16]

    Brown, A

    J. Brown, A. Abdelfata, J.-S. Camier, V. Dobrev, J. Dongarra, P. Fischer, A. Fisher, Y. Dudouit, A. Haidar, K. Kamran, T. Kalev, M. Min, T. Ratnayaka, M. Shephard, 24 LOW-ORDER PRECONDITIONERS FOR HIGH-ORDER CG AND DG C. Smith, S. Tomov, V. Tomov, and T. W arburton , CEED ECP ...

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    Burman and A

    E. Burman and A. Ern , Continuous interior penalty hp-finite element methods for advection and advection-diffusion equations, Mathematics of Computation, 76 (2007), pp. 1119–1141, https://doi. org/10.1090/s0025-5718-07-01951-5 , https://doi.org/10.1090%2Fs0025-5718-07-01951-5

    2007 doi

  10. [18]

    Canuto , Stabilization of spectral methods by finite element bubble functions , Computer Meth- ods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 116 (1994), pp

    C. Canuto , Stabilization of spectral methods by finite element bubble functions , Computer Meth- ods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 116 (1994), pp. 13–26, https://doi.org/10.1016/ s0045-7825(94)80004-9, https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fs0045-7825%2894%2980004-9

    1994

  11. [19]

    Canuto, P

    C. Canuto, P. Gervasio, and A. Quarteroni , Finite-element preconditioning of G-NI spectral methods, SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 31 (2010), pp. 4422–4451, https://doi.org/10. 1137/090746367, https://doi.org/10.1137%2F090746367

    2010

  12. [20]

    Canuto, M

    C. Canuto, M. Y. Hussaini, A. Quarteroni, and T. A. Zang , Spectral methods, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2006, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30726-6 , https://doi.org/10. 1007%2F978-3-540-30726-6

    2006 doi

  13. [21]

    Canuto and A

    C. Canuto and A. Quarteroni , Approximation results for orthogonal polynomials in Sobolev spaces, Mathematics of Computation, 38 (1982), pp. 67–67

    1982

  14. [22]

    Canuto and A

    C. Canuto and A. Quarteroni , Preconditioned minimal residual methods for Chebyshev spectral calculations, Journal of Computational Physics, 60 (1985), pp. 315–337, https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0021-9991(85)90010-5, https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0021-9991%2885%2990010-5

    1985

  15. [23]

    Canuto, A

    C. Canuto, A. Quarteroni, M. Y. Hussaini, and T. A. Zang , Spectral methods, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30728-0 , https://doi.org/10. 1007%2F978-3-540-30728-0

    2007 doi

  16. [24]

    Chalmers and T

    N. Chalmers and T. W arburton, Low-order preconditioning of high-order triangular finite elements, SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 40 (2018), pp. A4040–A4059, https://doi.org/10.1137/ 17m1149444, https://doi.org/10.1137%2F17m1149444

    2018

  17. [25]

    Cuthill and J

    E. Cuthill and J. McKee , Reducing the bandwidth of sparse symmetric matrices , in Proceedings of the 1969 24th national conference, ACM Press, 1969, https://doi.org/10.1145/800195.805928, https://doi.org/10.1145%2F800195.805928

    1969

  18. [26]

    E. F. D’Azevedo, P. A. Forsyth, and W.-P. Tang , Ordering methods for preconditioned conju- gate gradient methods applied to unstructured grid problems, SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Ap- plications, 13 (1992), pp. 944–961, https://doi.org/10.1137/0613057, https://doi.org...

    1992 doi

  19. [27]

    E. F. D’Azevedo, P. A. Forsyth, and W.-P. Tang , Towards a cost-effective ILU preconditioner with high level fill , BIT, 32 (1992), pp. 442–463, https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02074880, https:// doi.org/10.1007%2Fbf02074880

    1992 doi

  20. [28]

    M. O. Deville and E. H. Mund , Finite-element preconditioning for pseudospectral solutions of elliptic problems, SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing, 11 (1990), pp. 311–342, https: //doi.org/10.1137/0911019, https://doi.org/10.1137%2F0911019

    1990 doi

  21. [29]

    Dryja and O

    M. Dryja and O. B. Widlund , Some domain decomposition algorithms for elliptic problems , in Iterative Methods for Large Linear Systems, Elsevier, 1990, pp. 273–291, https://doi.org/10.1016/ b978-0-12-407475-0.50022-x , https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fb978-0-12-407475-0.50022-x

    1990

  22. [30]

    R. D. F algout and U. M. Yang , hypre: a library of high performance preconditioners , in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002, pp. 632–641,https://doi.org/10.1007/ 3-540-47789-6_66 , https://doi.org/10.1007%2F3-540-47789-6_66

    2002

  23. [31]

    K. J. Fidkowski, T. A. Oliver, J. Lu, and D. L. Darmofal , p-multigrid solution of high- order discontinuous Galerkin discretizations of the compressible Navier-Stokes equations , Journal of Computational Physics, 207 (2005), pp. 92–113, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2005.01.0...

    2005 doi

  24. [32]

    P. F. Fischer , An overlapping Schwarz method for spectral element solution of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations , Journal of Computational Physics, 133 (1997), pp. 84–101, https://doi. org/10.1006/jcph.1997.5651, https://doi.org/10.1006%2Fjcph.1997.5651

    1997

  25. [33]

    P. F. Fischer and J. W. Lottes , Hybrid Schwarz-multigrid methods for the spectral element method: Extensions to Navier-Stokes , in Domain Decomposition Methods in Science and Engineering, Springer, LOW-ORDER PRECONDITIONERS FOR HIGH-ORDER CG AND DG 25 2005, pp. 35–49, https:/...

    2005 doi

  26. [34]

    Fortunato, C

    D. Fortunato, C. H. Rycroft, and R. Saye , Efficient operator-coarsening multigrid schemes for local discontinuous Galerkin methods , SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 41 (2019), pp. A3913– A3937, https://doi.org/10.1137/18m1206357, https://doi.org/10.1137%2F18m1206357

    2019 doi

  27. [35]

    Hackbusch, Multi-grid methods and applications, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1985, https://doi

    W. Hackbusch, Multi-grid methods and applications, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1985, https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-662-02427-0 , https://doi.org/10.1007%2F978-3-662-02427-0

    1985 doi

  28. [36]

    Hassan, E

    O. Hassan, E. Probert, K. Morgan, and J. Peraire , Line relaxation methods for the solution of 2D and 3D compressible flows , in 11th Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, July 1993, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1993-3366, htt...

    1993 doi

  29. [37]

    Heinrichs , Line relaxation for spectral multigrid methods , Journal of Computational Physics, 77 (1988), pp

    W. Heinrichs , Line relaxation for spectral multigrid methods , Journal of Computational Physics, 77 (1988), pp. 166–182, https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(88)90161-1, https://doi.org/10. 1016%2F0021-9991%2888%2990161-1

    1988 doi

  30. [38]

    Helenbrook, D

    B. Helenbrook, D. Mavriplis, and H. Atkins , Analysis of “p”-multigrid for continuous and discon- tinuous finite element discretizations , in 16th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, Amer- ican Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, June 2003, https://doi.org/10.2...

    2003 doi

  31. [39]

    B. T. Helenbrook and H. L. Atkins , Application of p-multigrid to discontinuous Galerkin formu- lations of the Poisson equation , AIAA Journal, 44 (2006), pp. 566–575, https://doi.org/10.2514/1. 15497, https://doi.org/10.2514%2F1.15497

    2006 doi

  32. [40]

    V. E. Henson and U. M. Yang , BoomerAMG: a parallel algebraic multigrid solver and preconditioner, Applied Numerical Mathematics, 41 (2002), pp. 155–177, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-9274(01) 00115-5, https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fs0168-9274%2801%2900115-5

    2002 doi

  33. [41]

    Klckner, T

    A. Klckner, T. W arburton, J. Bridge, and J. Hesthaven, Nodal discontinuous Galerkin methods on graphics processors, Journal of Computational Physics, 228 (2009), pp. 7863–7882, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jcp.2009.06.041, https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.jcp.2009.06.041

    2009 doi

  34. [42]

    Kronbichler and K

    M. Kronbichler and K. Ljungkvist , Multigrid for matrix-free high-order finite element com- putations on graphics processors , ACM Transactions on Parallel Computing, 6 (2019), pp. 1–32, https://doi.org/10.1145/3322813, https://doi.org/10.1145%2F3322813

    2019 doi

  35. [43]

    P. L. Lions , On the Schwarz alternating method. I. , in Domain Decomposition Methods for Partial Differential Equations, R. Glowinski, G. Golub, G. Meurant, and J. P´ eriaux, eds., SIAM, 1988

    1988

  36. [44]

    J. W. Lottes and P. F. Fischer , Hybrid multigrid/Schwarz algorithms for the spectral ele- ment method , Journal of Scientific Computing, 24 (2005), pp. 45–78, https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10915-004-4787-3 , https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10915-004-4787-3

    2005

  37. [45]

    D. J. Mavriplis , Multigrid strategies for viscous flow solvers on anisotropic unstructured meshes , Journal of Computational Physics, 145 (1998), pp. 141–165

    1998

  38. [46]

    Melenk, K

    J. Melenk, K. Gerdes, and C. Schwab , Fully discretehp-finite elements: fast quadrature, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 190 (2001), pp. 4339–4364, https://doi.org/10. 1016/s0045-7825(00)00322-4, https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fs0045-7825%2800%2900322-4

    2001

  39. [47]

    M ¨uthing, M

    S. M ¨uthing, M. Piatkowski, and P. Bastian , High-performance implementation of matrix-free high-order discontinuous Galerkin methods , 2017, https://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:1711.10885

    2017 arXiv

  40. [48]

    L. N. Olson and J. B. Schroder , Smoothed aggregation multigrid solvers for high-order discontinuous Galerkin methods for elliptic problems , Journal of Computational Physics, 230 (2011), pp. 6959–6976, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2011.05.009, https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.jcp...

    2011 doi

  41. [49]

    L. N. Olson and J. B. Schroder , PyAMG: Algebraic multigrid solvers in Python v4.0 , 2018, https: //github.com/pyamg/pyamg. Release 4.0

    2018

  42. [50]

    S. A. Orszag , Spectral methods for problems in complex geometries , Journal of Computational Physics, 37 (1980), pp. 70–92, https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(80)90005-4, https://doi. org/10.1016%2F0021-9991%2880%2990005-4

    1980 doi

  43. [51]

    L. F. Pavarino, Additive Schwarz methods for the p-version finite element method , Numerische Math- ematik, 66 (1993), pp. 493–515, https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01385709, https://doi.org/10.1007% 2Fbf01385709

    1993 doi

  44. [52]

    Pazner and P.-O

    W. Pazner and P.-O. Persson , Approximate tensor-product preconditioners for very high order discontinuous Galerkin methods , Journal of Computational Physics, 354 (2018), pp. 344–369, https: 26 LOW-ORDER PRECONDITIONERS FOR HIGH-ORDER CG AND DG //doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2017.10...

    2018 doi

  45. [53]

    Pazner and P.-O

    W. Pazner and P.-O. Persson , Interior penalty tensor-product preconditioners for high-order discontinuous Galerkin discretizations , in 2018 AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, American Insti- tute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Jan. 2018, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2018-1093, ...

    2018 doi

  46. [54]

    Persson and J

    P.-O. Persson and J. Peraire , Newton-GMRES preconditioning for discontinuous Galerkin dis- cretizations of the Navier-Stokes equations, SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 30 (2008), pp. 2709– 2733, https://doi.org/10.1137/070692108, https://doi.org/10.1137%2F070692108

    2008 doi

  47. [55]

    J. W. Ruge and K. St ¨uben, Algebraic multigrid, in Multigrid methods, S. F. McCormick, ed., Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Jan. 1987, ch. 4, pp. 73–130, https://doi.org/10.1137/1. 9781611971057.ch4, https://doi.org/10.1137%2F1.9781611971057.ch4

    1987 doi

  48. [56]

    Shahbazi , An explicit expression for the penalty parameter of the interior penalty method , Journal of Computational Physics, 205 (2005), pp

    K. Shahbazi , An explicit expression for the penalty parameter of the interior penalty method , Journal of Computational Physics, 205 (2005), pp. 401–407, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2004.11.017, https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.jcp.2004.11.017

    2005 doi

  49. [57]

    J. Shen, F. W ang, and J. Xu , A finite element multigrid preconditioner for Chebyshev-collocation methods, Applied Numerical Mathematics, 33 (2000), pp. 471–477, https://doi.org/10.1016/ s0168-9274(99)00114-2, https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fs0168-9274%2899%2900114-2

    2000

  50. [58]

    Slotnick, A

    J. Slotnick, A. Khodadoust, J. Alonso, D. L. Darmofal, W. Gropp, E. Lurie, and D. J. Mavriplis, CFD vision 2030 study: a path to revolutionary computational aerosciences , Tech. Report NASA-CR-2014-218178, NASA Langley, 2014

    2014

  51. [59]

    Toselli and O

    A. Toselli and O. B. Widlund , Domain decomposition methods — algorithms and theory , Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2005, https://doi.org/10.1007/b137868, https://doi.org/10.1007% 2Fb137868

    2005 doi

  52. [60]

    Vermeire, F

    B. Vermeire, F. Witherden, and P. Vincent , On the utility of GPU accelerated high-order methods for unsteady flow simulations: a comparison with industry-standard tools , Journal of Computational Physics, 334 (2017), pp. 497–521,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2016.12.049, https...

    2017 doi

  53. [61]

    W ang, K

    Z. W ang, K. Fidkowski, R. Abgrall, F. Bassi, D. Caraeni, A. Cary, H. Deconinck, R. Hartmann, K. Hillewaert, H. Huynh, N. Kroll, G. May, P.-O. Persson, B. van Leer, and M. Visbal , High-order CFD methods: current status and perspective , International Jour- nal for Numerical M...

    2013 doi

  54. [62]

    Wesseling , Introduction to multigrid methods , Tech

    P. Wesseling , Introduction to multigrid methods , Tech. Report NASA-CR-195045, Institute for Ap- plied Mathematics and Computer Science, NASA, 1995

    1995

  55. [63]

    Xu , Iterative methods by space decomposition and subspace correction , SIAM Review, 34 (1992), pp

    J. Xu , Iterative methods by space decomposition and subspace correction , SIAM Review, 34 (1992), pp. 581–613, https://doi.org/10.1137/1034116, https://doi.org/10.1137%2F1034116

    1992 doi

  56. [64]

    Xu and L

    J. Xu and L. Zikatanov , The method of alternating projections and the method of subspace corrections in Hilbert space, Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 15 (2002), pp. 573–598

    2002

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.