Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 59 references

Invariant-region-preserving WENO schemes for one-dimensional multispecies kinematic flow models

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read High-order WENO finite volume schemes can be made to preserve the invariant region of multispecies kinematic flow models, and this paper proves it.

desk verdict Useful IRP limiter and solid IRP proofs, but the high-order accuracy proof has a reversed inequality that needs fixing. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.03864 v1 pith:4YE3GMF4 submitted 2025-06-04 math.NA cs.NA

Juan Barajas-Calonge , Raimund Bürger , Pep Mulet , Luis-Miguel Villada This is my paper
classification math.NAcs.NA MSC 65M0865M1235L65
keywords invariantregionpreservingWENOmultispecieskinematicflowfinitevolumeschemelocalLax-FriedrichsfluxHLLpolydispersesedimentationmulticlasstraffic
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

The paper proves that high-order WENO finite volume schemes can be made to preserve the invariant region of multispecies kinematic flow models, the set of physically admissible vectors whose components are nonnegative and sum to at most a maximum total density. The key is a two-step modification of the Zhang-Shu linear scaling limiter: first each species' reconstruction polynomial is scaled around its cell average to keep it nonnegative, then a second scaling is applied to the sum of the scaled polynomials to cap the total at the maximum. With local Lax-Friedrichs or HLL fluxes and the modified reconstructions, the fully discrete scheme is shown to preserve the region under a CFL condition whose upper bound contains the first Legendre-Gauss-Lobatto quadrature weight. The proof relies on structural assumptions on the velocity functions that are verified for the multiclass LWR traffic model and the Masliyah-Lockett-Bassoon sedimentation model, and numerical tests confirm both the invariant-region property and the expected order of accuracy.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the two-step linear scaling limiter built on the Zhang-Shu construction. Step one applies, componentwise, the classic limiter $\theta_i = \min\{(\phi^n_{i,j}-\delta)/(\phi^n_{i,j}-m_i^{(j)}), 1\}$ to each WENO reconstruction polynomial $P_i^{(j)}$, guaranteeing nonnegativity of every species. Step two applies a second limiter $\hat\theta$ to the sum polynomial $Q_j = \sum_i \tilde P_i^{(j)}$, using $M_j = \max Q_j$ on the quadrature stencil, namely $\hat\theta = \min\{|(\phi_{\max} - \phi^n_j)/(M_j - \phi^n_j)|, 1\}$, which guarantees the total stays below $\phi_{\max}$. The resulting polynomials (4.9) satisfy the vector-valued invariant region pointwise, so when paired with the LLF or HLL two-point fluxes the update becomes a convex combination of $\mathbb{D}_{\phi_{\max}}$-valued states whenever the CFL condition $\alpha \lambda^n \le \mu \hat w_1$ holds. The analysis also uses the structural identity (1.5), $\phi_i v_i(\Phi) = w(\phi) \kappa^T \Phi$, and the eigenvalue-side condition (1.9) to control the smallest characteristic speed.

What would settle it

Set up a two-species model of the form (1.1) whose velocities satisfy (1.5)-(1.8) but violate (1.9) at some admissible $\Phi$ — for instance take $w$ with a decreasing derivative $w'(\phi)$ or choose $\psi(\phi)\kappa^T\Phi$ exceeding $\lambda_N(\Phi)$ — and advance one step with the IRP-WENO scheme under the stated CFL condition; if any component turns negative or the total density exceeds $\phi_{\max}$, the assumption (1.9) is shown to be indispensable. An analytic check is to inspect inequality (3.20): when $w'(\phi)$ is not nondecreasing, the estimate $Y \le 0$ can reverse sign and the convex-combination argument collapses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is Theorem 3: for the finite volume marching formula (4.5) with the doubly limited reconstruction polynomials (4.9), if $\Phi_j^n \in \mathbb{D}_{\phi_{\max}}$ and the CFL condition $\alpha \lambda^n \le \mu \hat w_1$ holds, then $\Phi_j^{n+1} \in \mathbb{D}_{\phi_{\max}}$. Here $\mu = 1$ for the LLF flux and $\mu = 1/2$ for the HLL flux, and $\hat w_1$ is the first quadrature weight of the $G$-point Legendre-Gauss-Lobatto rule used in the limiter. The proof writes each update as a convex combination of states in the invariant region, using the first-order IRP theorems for the LLF and HLL fluxes plus the fact (Lemma 1) that the modified reconstruction polynomials take values in $\mathbb{D}_{\phi_{\max}}$ throughout each cell. The accuracy analysis in Section 4.4 shows the two-step limiter does not reduce the formal order: on smooth data the limited polynomials differ from the unmodified reconstructions only by $O(\Delta x^{r+1})$.

Load-bearing premise

The whole invariant-region guarantee rests on the existence of a scalar function $w(\phi)$ and a companion function $\psi(\phi)$ satisfying (1.5)-(1.9), especially the eigenvalue inequality $\psi(\phi)\kappa^T\Phi \le \lambda_N(\Phi)$; the authors verify these for the MCLWR and MLB models, but any new multispecies model needs its own verification.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Numerical simulations of multiclass traffic and polydisperse sedimentation with the new schemes never produce negative partial densities or total densities above the physical maximum, while retaining third- and fifth-order accuracy on smooth data.
  • The CFL restriction $\alpha \lambda^n \le \mu \hat w_1$ means the time step must be reduced by the factor $\hat w_1$ (for example $1/6$ for third order and $1/12$ for fifth order), a quantifiable cost of the invariant-region guarantee.
  • The first-order LLF and HLL schemes are themselves proven invariant-region-preserving under $\alpha \lambda \le 1$ and $\alpha \lambda \le 1/2$, respectively, providing a rigorous base for the high-order extensions.
  • Any other multispecies kinematic model whose velocity functions fit the structural conditions (1.5)-(1.9), such as the oil-water dispersion models mentioned in the paper, inherits the same invariant-region guarantee.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The two-step limiter should transfer to other high-order reconstructions, including WENO-Z, WENO-AO, discontinuous Galerkin, and multidimensional extensions, because it only uses cell averages, quadrature nodes, and a linear invariant region defined by nonnegativity plus one linear inequality.
  • The role of condition (1.9) suggests a practical verification checklist for new models: find $w$, $\kappa$, and $\psi$, and confirm the eigenvalue-bound inequality before trusting the advertised invariant-region property.
  • Because the limiter is applied componentwise first and to the sum second, it likely introduces less clipping than a single vector limiter that scales all components together; this could make the scheme less diffusive near shocks, a testable property on the Daganzo example.
  • On near-vacuum states where $\phi^n_{i,j}$ is tiny, the first limiter may locally degrade in the sense that the ratio $(\phi^n_{i,j}-\delta)/(\phi^n_{i,j}-m_i^{(j)})$ becomes sensitive, although the reported numerical minima suggest only machine-precision floors rather than a visible loss of accuracy.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes invariant-region-preserving (IRP) finite volume WENO schemes for one-dimensional multispecies kinematic flow systems of the form ∂tΦ + ∂x f(Φ) = 0, where the physically admissible states lie in D_φmax. The authors prove IRP for first-order LLF and HLL schemes under structural assumptions (1.5)–(1.9) on the flux, verify these assumptions for the multiclass LWR and Masliyah–Lockett–Bassoon models, and then introduce a two-step modification of the Zhang–Shu linear-scaling limiter applied componentwise to WENO reconstructions. The main result, Theorem 3, states that the resulting high-order scheme preserves D_φmax under the CFL condition (4.15). Section 4.4 claims that the two limiters do not destroy the formal order of accuracy, and Section 5 provides numerical convergence studies and tabulated minima/maxima confirming that the limited schemes keep the solution inside D_φmax while the unlimited schemes do not.

Significance. If fully established, the paper would make a useful contribution: it gives a constructive way to enforce both nonnegativity of each species and an upper bound on the total density for high-order WENO discretizations of strongly coupled multispecies conservation laws, with explicit CFL conditions and numerical evidence including challenging sedimentation and traffic benchmarks. The first-order IRP proofs in Theorems 1–2 are detailed and the convex-combination structure exploited in Theorem 3 is elegant. The numerical section is unusually careful in reporting extrema with and without limiters. However, the advertised central claim is a high-order IRP scheme, and the proof that the second limiter preserves high-order accuracy contains a real error; in addition, the IRP theorem as stated has a hypothesis mismatch involving the positivity threshold δ. These issues are fixable but are load-bearing for the paper's main claims.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 4.4] The accuracy proof for the second limiter contains a reversed inequality. Shortly after Eq. (4.17), the manuscript asserts M_j - φ_j^n ≥ Σ_ℓ (M_j^(ℓ) - φ_ℓ,j^n) ≥ M_j^(i) - φ_i,j^n, where M_j = max_x Σ_ℓ \tilde P_j^(ℓ)(x) and M_j^(ℓ) = max_x \tilde P_j^(ℓ)(x). Since the maximum of a sum is at most the sum of the maxima, the first inequality is backwards: M_j - φ_j^n ≤ Σ_ℓ (M_j^(ℓ) - φ_ℓ,j^n), not ≥. A concrete counterexample on I = [-1,1] is \tilde P_1 = 0.5 + x and \tilde P_2 = 0.5 - x, for which M_1 - φ_1 = 1, M_2 - φ_2 = 1, but Q = \tilde P_1 + \tilde P_2 ≡ 1, so M_j - φ_j = 0. The subsequent bound on |\tilde P_i - φ_i| / (M_j - φ_j) is therefore unjustified, and the proof that the post-processing (4.9) preserves O(Δx^{r+1}) accuracy does not go through as written. A direct scalar limiter argument applied to the sum polynomial Q_j = Σ_ℓ \tilde P_j^(ℓ), rather than a reduction to the componentwise maxima, appears to be the natural repair. This gap does not invalidate Theorem 3 or the numerical convergence evidence, but it leaves the 'high-order' part of the central claim unproved.
  2. [Section 4.3 and Theorem 3] There is a mismatch between the hypotheses used to define the first limiter and the hypotheses of Lemma 1 and Theorem 3. The limiter (4.7) is introduced under the assumption Φ_j^n ∈ D_φmax^δ, i.e., φ_i,j^n ≥ δ for all i, and the proof that \tilde P_j^(i) ≥ 0 requires θ_i ∈ [0,1]. Lemma 1 and Theorem 3, however, are stated under the weaker assumption Φ_j^n ∈ D_φmax. If some component vanishes, as in the initial data of Example 5 (Φ_L = (0,0,0,0)^T) or in vacuum regions that may be produced dynamically, formula (4.7) can involve a negative numerator or a zero denominator, and the argument that the modified polynomial is nonnegative fails. The numerical tables suggest that the implementation handles such cases, but the theorem as stated does not cover them. The authors should either restrict Theorem 3 to D_φmax^δ and treat zero-density states separately, or modify the limiter definition so that it is well-defined and positivity-preserving for all of D_φmax.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (3.14)] After summing (3.13) over i, the second and third terms should contain the total densities φ_{j+1} and φ_{j-1}, not the component φ_{i,j+1} and φ_{i,j-1}; as written the indices are inconsistent.
  2. [Section 3.3] In the definition of G4 immediately after (3.26), the displayed expression appears to contain a typo: it should define G4(Φ_j) = Φ_j - f(Φ_j)/S_{R,j-1/2}^+, not with Φ_{j-1} as the first argument.
  3. [Abstract and Section 1.1] The text contains several typographical slips: 'HHL' for HLL in Section 3.2, 'of of' in Remark 2, and 'appying'/'difficulties' in Section 6. These should be corrected in a final revision.
  4. [Section 4.4] The proof relies on [40, Appendix C] for the scalar ratio bounds but does not reproduce or state those bounds; adding a precise statement of the needed scalar lemma would make the accuracy analysis more self-contained, especially since the preceding reduction to the scalar case is the part that needs repair.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the IRP results are conditional theorems proven from stated model assumptions, and the numerical validation is genuinely predictive.

full rationale

The paper's central derivations are theorem-and-proof arguments, not fits. Theorem 1 and Theorem 2 prove that the first-order LLF and HLL schemes preserve D_phi_max whenever the flux satisfies assumptions (1.5)-(1.9), using explicit convex-combination representations (3.12) and (3.27). Theorem 3 extends this to the WENO reconstruction by proving that the two-step limiters produce polynomials with values in D_phi_max (Lemma 1) and then applying the first-order IRP result to the Legendre-Gauss-Lobatto quadrature nodes. No parameter in these proofs is fitted to output data; the CFL conditions are derived, not calibrated. The model assumptions (1.5)-(1.9) are verified for MCLWR and MLB models, with eigenvalue bounds taken from prior work; even where those prior works share authors (e.g. [6,16]), the cited results are parameter-free, externally testable facts about the Jacobian spectrum and do not assume the IRP conclusion. The numerical examples check convergence against a reference-grid solution and tabulate extrema a posteriori; there is no fitted constant disguised as a prediction. The Section 4.4 accuracy argument contains a suspected reversed inequality (M_j - phi_j^n <= sum_ell(M_ell - phi_ell^n), not >=), but that is a correctness gap in the order-of-accuracy proof, not circular reasoning: it does not make a predicted quantity equal to an input by construction. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained conditional on the stated hypotheses and cited spectral lemmas.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on structural assumptions about the flux, namely the existence of w and psi with monotonicity and eigenvalue bounds (1.5)-(1.9), verified only for the two concrete models MCLWR and MLB. All other ingredients such as quadrature, the secular equation, and the Zhang-Shu limiter analysis are standard background pulled from cited literature. No free parameters are fitted to data; the only hand-chosen values are algorithmic tolerances (delta, epsilon, p). No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • delta (positivity threshold) = 1e-12
    Used in the per-species limiter (4.7) to avoid division by zero; chosen by hand, not fitted to data. The theorem works with D^delta but the stated IRP property is for D.
  • epsilon (WENO regularization) = Delta x^2 (or 1e-6 in Example 1)
    Appears in the nonlinear weights (4.1); a standard WENO parameter chosen by hand. The IRP proof does not depend on its value.
  • p (WENO exponent) = 2
    Exponent in (4.1), set to 2 in all tests; standard choice from the WENO literature, not fitted to data.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption There exists a piecewise differentiable function w=w(phi) such that sum_i phi_i v_i = w(phi) kappa^T Phi, with w >= 0, w(phi_max) = 0, and w' nondecreasing on [0, phi_max].
    Assumptions (1.5)-(1.8), stated in Section 1.1. This structural condition turns the total-density update into a convex combination bound and is verified for MCLWR and MLB in Sections 2.1-2.2.
  • domain assumption There exists a piecewise continuous function psi(phi) such that psi(phi) kappa^T Phi <= lambda_N(Phi) and w'(phi) >= psi(phi) for all Phi in D_phi_max.
    Assumption (1.9), used in the upper-bound arguments for the total density, see (3.20) and (3.37). It is the load-bearing premise for the IRP proof; not verified for models outside MCLWR and MLB.
  • standard math The system (1.1) is hyperbolic on D_phi_max and the interlacing property (A.3) from the secular equation supplies the eigenvalue bounds M1 and M2 for the MCLWR and MLB fluxes.
    Sections 2.1-2.2 and Appendix A. Standard theory from [6,16,59] that supplies the bounds used in the LLF and HLL flux estimates.
  • standard math The G-point Legendre-Gauss-Lobatto quadrature rule is exact for polynomials of degree up to 2G-3.
    Used in Section 4.3 to evaluate the cell-average identity (4.12) and to replace the extrema of reconstruction polynomials with quadrature-node minima and maxima.
  • standard math The scalar ratio bounds needed in the accuracy analysis of the limiter in Section 4.4 are valid as stated in [40, Appendix C].
    The paper does not reproduce these bounds; it cites [40] for the technical inequality. This is a minor reliance on prior literature and does not affect the IRP proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Invariant-region-preserving WENO schemes for one-dimensional multispecies kinematic flow models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4YE3GMF4

@misc{pith2026250603864,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Invariant-region-preserving WENO schemes for one-dimensional multispecies kinematic flow models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4YE3GMF4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.03864}
}
read the original abstract

Multispecies kinematic flow models are defined by systems of N strongly coupled, nonlinear first-order conservation laws, where the solution is a vector of N partial volume fractions or densities. These models arise in various applications including multiclass vehicular traffic and sedimentation of polydisperse suspensions. The solution vector should take values in a set of physically relevant values (i.e., the components are nonnegative and sum up at most to a given maximum value). It is demonstrated that this set, the so-called invariant region, is preserved by numerical solutions produced by a new family of high-order finite volume numerical schemes adapted to this class of models. To achieve this property, and motivated by [X. Zhang, C.-W. Shu, On maximum-principle-satisfying high order schemes for scalar conservation laws, J. Comput. Phys. 229 (2010) 3091--3120], a pair of linear scaling limiters is applied to a high-order weighted essentially non-oscillatory (WENO) polynomial reconstruction to obtain invariant-region-preserving (IRP) high-order polynomial reconstructions. These reconstructions are combined with a local Lax-Friedrichs (LLF) or Harten-Lax-van Leer (HLL) numerical flux to obtain a high-order numerical scheme for the system of conservation laws. It is proved that this scheme satisfies an IRP property under a suitable Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy (CFL) condition. The theoretical analysis is corroborated with numerical simulations for models of multiclass traffic flow and polydisperse sedimentation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.03864 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Example 1 (MLB Model, N = 3): numerical results obtained by scheme IRP-HLLW-5 with M = 1600 at simulated time (a) T = 5 s, (b) T = 10 s, (c) approximate L 1 errors for all schemes tested as function of M, (d) efficiency plot obtained for discretization levels ∆x = 1/M with M = 100, 200, 400, 800, and 1600. In order to study the effect of the limiters (4.7) and (4.8), we compute the minimum values of the numerical so… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Example 2 (MLB model, N = 2): reference solution for (a) ϕ1, ϕ2 and (b) ϕ at T = 50 s computed by scheme IRP-HLLW-3 with Mref = 6400, and comparison of schemes for (c) ϕ1, (d) enlarged view of (c), (e) ϕ, and (f) enlarged view of (e) at T = 50 s with M = 1600. 5.5. Example 4: MCLWR model, N = 3 We now study the MCLWR model on a road of length L = 5 mi (mi stands for miles) with N = 3 driver classes associated with β… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Example 2 (MLB model, N = 2): reference solution for (a) ϕ1, ϕ2 and (b) ϕ at T = 300 s computed by scheme IRP-HLLW-3 with Mref = 6400, and (c) comparison of schemes for ϕ1, (d) enlarged view of (c), at T = 300 s with M = 1600. The initial density distribution is given by Φ0(x) = p(x)(0.25, 0.4, 0.35)T , where p describes an isolated platoon on 1 ≤ x ≤ 2 followed by a constant maximum density function for x ≥ 4, i.e.… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Example 2 (MLB model, N = 2): (a) comparison of the numerical solutions for ϕ at T = 50 s computed by IRP-HLLW-3 with various step sizes, (b)–(d) enlarged views of (a). consider the initial condition Φ(x, 0) =    ΦL for x < L/2, ΦR for x ≥ L/2, where ΦL = (0, 0,…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Example 3 (MLB model, N = 4): reference solution for (a) ϕ1, . . . , ϕ4 and (b) ϕ at T = 50 s computed by scheme IRP-HLLW-3 with Mref = 6400, and comparison of schemes for (c) ϕ1, (d) enlarged view of (c) at T = 50 s with M = 1600. with functions f x and f y that have …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Example 3 (MLB model, N = 4): reference solution for (a) ϕ1, . . . , ϕ4 and (b) ϕ at T = 300 s computed by scheme IRP-HLLW-3 with Mref = 6400, and (c) comparison of schemes for ϕ, (d) enlarged view of (c) at T = 300 s with M = 1600. densities ϕ1, . . . , ϕN but rather …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Example 4 (MCLWR model, N = 3): reference solution for (a) ϕ1, ϕ2, ϕ3 and (b) ϕ at T = 0.05 h computed by scheme IRP-HLLW-3 with Mref = 6400, and comparison of schemes for (c) ϕ3, (d) enlarged view of (c), (e) ϕ, and (f) enlarged view of (e) at T = 0.05 h with M = 1600…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Example 4 (MCLWR model, N = 3): reference solution for (a) ϕ1, ϕ2, ϕ3 and (b) ϕ at T = 0.5 h computed by scheme IRP-HLLW-3 with Mref = 6400, and comparison of schemes for (c) ϕ2, (d) enlarged view of (c), (e) ϕ, and (f) enlarged view of (e) at T = 0.5 h with M = 1600. …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Example 5 (MCLWR model, Daganzo’s test, N = 4): reference solution for (a) ϕ1, . . . , ϕ4 and ϕ, (b) enlarged view of (a) at T = 0.5 h computed by scheme IRP-HLLW-3 with Mref = 6400, and comparison of schemes for (c) ϕ1, (d) enlarged view of (c), (e) ϕ, and (f) enlarge…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    G. C. K. Wong, S. C. Wong, A multi-class tra ffic flow model–an extension of LWR model with heterogeneous drivers, Transp. Res. A 36 (2002) 827–841

    work page 2002

  2. [2]

    Benzoni-Gavage, R

    S. Benzoni-Gavage, R. M. Colombo, An-populations model for tra ffic flow, Eur. J. Appl. Math. 14 (2003) 587–612. 29 0 1 2 3 4 5 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 (a) 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 (b) 0 1 2 3 4 5 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 LFW-3 IRP-LFW-3 REF (c) 1.045 1.05 1.055 1.06 1.065 1.07 1.075 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 10-4 LFW-3 IRP-LFW-3 REF (d) ...

    work page 2003

  3. [3]

    Bürger, F

    R. Bürger, F. Concha, K.-K. Fjelde, K. H. Karlsen, Numerical simulation of the settling of polydisperse suspensions of spheres, Powder Technol. 113 (2000) 30–54

    work page 2000

  4. [4]

    Bürger, K

    R. Bürger, K. H. Karlsen, E. M. Tory, W. L. Wendland, Model equations and instability regions for the sedimentation of polydisperse suspensions of spheres, ZAMM Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 82 (2002) 699–722

    work page 2002

  5. [5]

    Berres, R

    S. Berres, R. Bürger, E. M. Tory, Applications of polydisperse sedimentation models, Chem. Eng. J. 111 (2005) 105–117

    work page 2005

  6. [6]

    Bürger, R

    R. Bürger, R. Donat, P. Mulet, C. A. Vega, Hyperbolicity analysis of polydisperse sedimentation models via a secular equation for the flux Jacobian, SIAM J. Appl. Math. 70 (2010) 2186–2213

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    Rosso, G

    F. Rosso, G. Sona, Gravity-driven separation of oil-water dispersions, Adv. Math. Sci. Appl. 11 (2001) 127–151

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    Zhang, C.-W

    X. Zhang, C.-W. Shu, On maximum-principle-satisfying high order schemes for scalar conservation laws, J. Comput. Phys. 229 (2010) 3091–3120

    work page 2010

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    Gottlieb, C.-W

    S. Gottlieb, C.-W. Shu, E. Tadmor, Strong stability-preserving high-order time discretization methods, SIAM review 43 (1) (2001) 89–112

    2001

  2. [10]

    Gottlieb, D

    S. Gottlieb, D. I. Ketcheson, C.-W. Shu, High order strong stability preserving time discretizations, J. Sci. Comput. 38 (2009) 251–289

    2009

  3. [11]

    Frid, Invariant regions under Lax-Friedrichs scheme for multidimensional systems of conservation laws, Discr

    H. Frid, Invariant regions under Lax-Friedrichs scheme for multidimensional systems of conservation laws, Discr. Cont. Dyn. Syst. 1 (1995) 585–593

    1995

  4. [12]

    Bürger, A

    R. Bürger, A. García, K. H. Karlsen, J. D. Towers, A family of numerical schemes for kinematic flows with discontinuous flux, J. Engrg. Math. 60 (2008) 387–425

    2008

  5. [13]

    Bürger, C

    R. Bürger, C. Chalons, L. M. Villada, Antidi ffusive and random-sampling Lagrangian-remap schemes for the multiclass Lighthill-Whitham- 30 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 (a) 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 (b) 0 1 2 3 4 5 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 LFW-3 IRP-LFW-3 R...

    2013

  6. [14]

    Bürger, A

    R. Bürger, A. Kozakevicius, Adaptive multiresolution WENO schemes for multi-species kinematic flow models, J. Comput. Phys. 224 (2007) 1190–1222

    2007

  7. [15]

    Bürger, R

    R. Bürger, R. Donat, P. Mulet, C. A. Vega, On the implementation of WENO schemes for a class of polydisperse sedimentation models, J. Comput. Phys. 230 (2011) 2322–2344

    2011

  8. [16]

    Donat, P

    R. Donat, P. Mulet, A secular equation for the Jacobian matrix of certain multispecies kinematic flow models, Numer. Meth. Partial Di ff. Eqns. 26 (2010) 159–175

    2010

  9. [17]

    Bürger, P

    R. Bürger, P. Mulet, L. M. Villada, Spectral WENO schemes with adaptive mesh refinement for models of polydisperse sedimentation, ZAMM Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 93 (2013) 373–386

    2013

  10. [18]

    Bürger, P

    R. Bürger, P. Mulet, L. Rubio, Polynomial viscosity methods for multispecies kinematic flow models, Numer. Meth. Partial Di ff. Eqns. 32 (2016) 1265–1288

    2016

  11. [19]

    Bürger, H

    R. Bürger, H. Torres, C. A. Vega, An entropy stable scheme for the multiclass Lighthill-Whitham-Richards tra ffic model, Adv. Appl. Math. Mech 11 (2019) 1022–1047

    2019

  12. [20]

    Zhang, C.-W

    X. Zhang, C.-W. Shu, On positivity-preserving high order discontinuous Galerkin schemes for compressible Euler equations on rectangular meshes, J. Comput. Phys. 229 (2010) 8918–8934

    2010

  13. [21]

    Zhang, C.-W

    X. Zhang, C.-W. Shu, Maximum-principle-satisfying and positivity-preserving high-order schemes for conservation laws: survey and new developments, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 467 (2134) (2011) 2752–2776. 31 Table 7: Example 4 (MCLWR model, N = 3): L1 errors, numerical order, and CPU tim...

    2011

  14. [22]

    D. Levy, G. Puppo, G. Russo, Central WENO schemes for hyperbolic systems of conservation laws, ESAIM: Math. Model. Numer. Anal. 33 (1999) 547–571

    1999

  15. [23]

    Jiang, C.-W

    G.-S. Jiang, C.-W. Shu, E fficient implementation of weighted ENO schemes, J. Comput. Phys. 126 (1996) 202–228

    1996

  16. [24]

    Zhu, C.-W

    J. Zhu, C.-W. Shu, A new type of multi-resolution WENO schemes with increasingly higher order of accuracy, J. Comput. Phys. 375 (2018) 659–683

    2018

  17. [25]

    Borges, M

    R. Borges, M. Carmona, B. Costa, W. S. Don, An improved weighted essentially non-oscillatory scheme for hyperbolic conservation laws, J. Comput. Phys. 227 (2008) 3191–3211

    2008

  18. [26]

    Arbogast, C.-S

    T. Arbogast, C.-S. Huang, X. Zhao, Accuracy of WENO and adaptive order WENO reconstructions for solving conservation laws, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 56 (3) (2018) 1818–1847. doi:10.1137/17M1154758

    2018 doi

  19. [27]

    Harten, P

    A. Harten, P. D. Lax, B. van Leer, On upstream di fferencing and Godunov-type schemes for hyperbolic conservation laws, SIAM Rev. 25 (1983) 35–61

    1983

  20. [28]

    Hilliges, W

    M. Hilliges, W. Weidlich, A phenomenological model for dynamic tra ffic flow in networks, Transp. Res. B 29 (1995) 407–431

    1995

  21. [29]

    Jaouen, F

    S. Jaouen, F. Lagoutière, Numerical transport of an arbitrary number of components, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engrg. 196 (2007) 3127– 3140

    2007

  22. [30]

    Ancellin, B

    M. Ancellin, B. Després, S. Jaouen, Extension of generic two-component VOF interface advection schemes to an arbitrary number of com- ponents, J. Comput. Phys. 473 (2023) 111721

    2023

  23. [31]

    Baumgart, G

    A. Baumgart, G. Blanquart, Ensuring P s ys = 1 in transport of species mass fractions, J. Comput. Phys. (2024) 113199

    2024

  24. [32]

    Huang, E

    Z. Huang, E. Johnsen, A consistent and conservative phase-field method for compressible N-phase flows: Consistent limiter and multiphase reduction-consistent formulation, J. Comput. Phys. 501 (2024) 112801

    2024

  25. [33]

    Zhang, C.-W

    X. Zhang, C.-W. Shu, Positivity-preserving high order discontinuous Galerkin schemes for compressible Euler equations with source terms, J. Comput. Phys. 230 (2011) 1238–1248

    2011

  26. [34]

    Zhang, Y

    W. Zhang, Y . Xing, Y . Xia, Y . Xu, High-order positivity-preserving well-balanced discontinuous Galerkin methods for Euler equations with gravitation on unstructured meshes, Commun. Comput. Phys. 31 (2022) 771–815

    2022

  27. [35]

    Y . Xing, X. Zhang, C.-W. Shu, Positivity-preserving high order well-balanced discontinuous Galerkin methods for the shallow water equa- tions, Adv. Wat. Res. 33 (2010) 1476–1493

    2010

  28. [36]

    Y . Xing, X. Zhang, Positivity-preserving well-balanced discontinuous Galerkin methods for the shallow water equations on unstructured 32 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 (a) 2.49 2.5 2.51 2.52 2.53 2.54 0.247 0.248 0.249 0.25 0.251 0.252 0.253 (b) 0 1 2 3 4 5 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 ...

    2013

  29. [37]

    Kuzmin, H

    D. Kuzmin, H. Hajduk, Property-preserving numerical schemes for conservation laws, World Scientific, 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    M. J. Lighthill, G. B. Whitham, On kinematic waves. II. A theory of tra ffic flow on long crowded roads, Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A 229 (1955) 317–345

    1955

  31. [39]

    P. I. Richards, Shock waves on the highway, Operations Res. 4 (1956) 42–51

    1956

  32. [40]

    Zhang, On positivity-preserving high order discontinuous galerkin schemes for compressible navier–stokes equations, Journal of Compu- tational Physics 328 (2017) 301–343

    X. Zhang, On positivity-preserving high order discontinuous galerkin schemes for compressible navier–stokes equations, Journal of Compu- tational Physics 328 (2017) 301–343

    2017

  33. [41]

    B. D. Greenshields, J. R. Bibbins, W. S. Channing, H. H. Miller, A study of tra ffic capacity, in: Highway Research Board Proceedings, V ol. 14, Washington, DC, 1935, pp. 448–477

    1935

  34. [42]

    A. C. Dick, Speed /flow relationships within an urban area, Traffic Eng. Control 8 (6) (1966) 393–396

    1966

  35. [43]

    Greenberg, An analysis of tra ffic flow, Operations Research 7 (1) (1959) 79–85

    H. Greenberg, An analysis of tra ffic flow, Operations Research 7 (1) (1959) 79–85

    1959

  36. [44]

    Donat, P

    R. Donat, P. Mulet, Characteristic-based schemes for multi-class Lighthill-Whitham-Richards tra ffic models, J. Sci. Comput. 37 (2008) 233– 250

    2008

  37. [45]

    Zhang, R.-X

    P. Zhang, R.-X. Liu, S. C. Wong, S.-Q. Dai, Hyperbolicity and kinematic waves of a class of multi-population partial di fferential equations, European J. Appl. Math. 17 (2006) 171–200

    2006

  38. [46]

    J. H. Masliyah, Hindered settling in a multi-species particle system, Chem. Eng. Sci. 34 (1979) 1166–1168

    1979

  39. [47]

    M. J. Lockett, K. S. Bassoon, Sedimentation of binary particle mixtures, Powder Technol. 24 (1979) 1–7

    1979

  40. [48]

    J. F. Richardson, W. N. Zaki, Sedimentation and fluidization I, Trans. Instn. Chem. Engrs. (London) 32 (1954) 35–53

    1954

  41. [49]

    X.-D. Liu, S. Osher, T. Chan, Weighted essentially non-oscillatory schemes, J. Comput. Phys. 115 (1994) 200–212

    1994

  42. [50]

    D. Levy, G. Puppo, G. Russo, Compact central WENO schemes for multidimensional conservation laws, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 22 (2000) 656–672

    2000

  43. [51]

    Cravero, G

    I. Cravero, G. Puppo, M. Semplice, G. Visconti, CWENO: uniformly accurate reconstructions for balance laws, Math. Comp. 87 (2018) 1689–1719

    2018

  44. [52]

    Boscarino, R

    S. Boscarino, R. Bürger, P. Mulet, G. Russo, L. M. Villada, On linearly implicit IMEX Runge-Kutta methods for degenerate convection- diffusion problems modeling polydisperse sedimentation, Bull. Braz. Math. Soc. (N.S.) 47 (2016) 171–185

    2016

  45. [53]

    Schneider, G

    W. Schneider, G. Anestis, U. Schaflinger, Sediment composition due to settling of particles of di fferent sizes, Int. J. Multiphase Flow 11 (1985) 419–423

    1985

  46. [54]

    H. P. Greenspan, M. Ungarish, On hindered settling of particles of di fferent sizes, Int. J. Multiphase Flow 8 (1982) 587–604

    1982

  47. [55]

    Bürger, W

    R. Bürger, W. L. Wendland, F. Concha, Model equations for gravitational sedimentation-consolidation processes, ZAMM Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 80 (2000) 79–92. 33 Table 9: Example 5 (MCLWR model, Daganzo’s test,N = 4): minimum of the solutionsϕn i, j, i = 1,..., 4, and maximum of t...

    2000

  48. [56]

    C. F. Daganzo, Requiem for second-order fluid approximations of tra ffic flow, Transp. Res. B 29 (1995) 277–286

    1995

  49. [57]

    Briani, E

    M. Briani, E. Cristiani, P. Ranut, Macroscopic and multi-scale models for multi-class vehicular dynamics with uneven space occupancy: a case study, Axioms 10 (2) (2021) 102

    2021

  50. [58]

    S. Fan, D. B. Work, A heterogeneous multiclass tra ffic flow model with creeping, SIAM J. Appl. Math. 75 (2015) 813–835

    2015

  51. [59]

    Anderson, A secular equation for the eigenvalues of a diagonal matrix perturbation, Linear Algebra Appl

    J. Anderson, A secular equation for the eigenvalues of a diagonal matrix perturbation, Linear Algebra Appl. 246 (1996) 49–70. 34

    1996

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.