On a Hybrid Mixed Domain Decomposition Method

Kersten Schmidt; Sebastian Sch\"ops; Timon Seibel

arxiv: 2604.22543 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-24 · 🧮 math.NA · cs.CE· cs.NA

On a Hybrid Mixed Domain Decomposition Method

Kersten Schmidt , Timon Seibel , Sebastian Sch\"ops This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 10:33 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.NA cs.CEcs.NA

keywords domain decompositionhybridized mixed methodstabilization parameterRaviart-Thomas elementsperturbed Galerkin methoddiscretization errorconvergence ratesfinite element analysis

0 comments

The pith

A hybrid mixed domain decomposition method with stabilization is well-posed for suitable spaces and has discretization error uniformly bounded in the stabilization parameter.

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

The paper introduces a domain decomposition formulation that borrows stabilization from hybridized discontinuous Galerkin methods and applies it to mixed finite elements. In this setting the divergence operator is extended to act on interfaces as an L2 surface quantity, and interface traces are replaced by L2 distributions. The authors prove well-posedness of the resulting perturbed Galerkin method when the finite-element spaces are chosen appropriately. They also derive an error bound that is written explicitly in terms of the stabilization parameter τ. Numerical tests on curved quadrilateral meshes with piecewise smooth solutions confirm the predicted rates.

Core claim

The formulation replaces standard interface traces by L2 distributions and lets the divergence appear on interfaces as an L2 surface quantity. For Raviart-Thomas dual elements paired with piecewise polynomial primal and hybrid variables the perturbed Galerkin method is shown to be well-posed. The discretization error is analyzed explicitly in the stabilization parameter τ; on curved quadrilateral meshes the error stays bounded independently of τ while the observed convergence rate for the primal and hybrid variables remains q+1 even for large τ and the dual variable approaches rate q + 1/2 asymptotically.

What carries the argument

Hybridization of the mixed domain decomposition scheme together with a stabilization term scaled by τ, analyzed through a consistent variational formulation in which divergence acts as an L2 surface quantity on interfaces.

If this is right

For small stabilization parameters the method attains the full convergence rate q+1 in all variables.
The discretization error remains bounded independently of the value of τ.
Even for large τ the primal and hybrid variables converge at rate q+1.
The dual variable convergence rate depends on both τ and mesh size, approaching q + 1/2 for large τ.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The explicit dependence on τ could be used to tune the method for a balance between accuracy and linear-system conditioning in applications.
Similar interface stabilization might be added to non-hybridized domain decomposition schemes to improve robustness without changing the underlying element spaces.
The uniform bound in τ suggests the formulation could remain stable under adaptive choice of τ on locally refined meshes.

Load-bearing premise

The finite-element spaces must be Raviart-Thomas elements for the dual variable and piecewise polynomials for the primal and hybrid variables, and the exact solution must be piecewise smooth on the curved quadrilateral meshes.

What would settle it

A computation on a curved quadrilateral mesh using the stated element spaces that shows the discretization error growing unboundedly with τ or failing to reach order q+1 for small τ would disprove the uniform bound and convergence claims.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.22543 by Kersten Schmidt, Sebastian Sch\"ops, Timon Seibel.

**Figure 2.1.** Figure 2.1: Exemplary depiction of Ω decomposed into four disjoint subdomains. The view at source ↗

**Figure 6.1.** Figure 6.1: Computational domain Ω and reference solution component view at source ↗

**Figure 6.2.** Figure 6.2: Numerical solution uh and µh (red lines) at polynomial order q = 0 (upper half) and q = 1 (lower half) for 0, 1 and 2 mesh refinements (from left to right). material function κ(x) = 16χ[0,1)(r) + 1χ(1,2](r) in polar coordinates with a jump at the interface and the right-hand side f(x) = ⎧⎪⎪ ⎨ ⎪⎪⎩ 47 2 √ 2 + √ 2r sin(φ) − 47 2 √ 2 − √ 2r cos(φ) + 1, 0 ≤ r < 1, √ 2 + √ 2r sin(φ) − √ 2 − √ 2r cos(φ) + 1, 1 … view at source ↗

**Figure 6.3.** Figure 6.3: Error plots for (a) uh, (b) qh, (c) div qh on Ω ∖Γ, (d) q qh ⋅n y , (e) q Πtr uh y and (f) µh (solid), Πtr uh (dashed) on Γ in dependence of τ for order q = 1. width h even for large values τ . This means, that for large τ we do not see an increase like √ 1 + τ , τ or 1 + τ as in the error estimates (2.7). Then, we see a uniform convergence of uh and µh in τ , with a rate of q +1 which corresponds to th… view at source ↗

**Figure 6.4.** Figure 6.4: Error plots for uh, qh and divqh on Ω ∖ Γ for order q = 0, 1, 2, 3 and τ = 2 (upper row) and τ = 400 (lower row). The slope triangles indicate the slope corresponding to the behavior expected by (6.1), and the rates of 1.4 and 1.2 for the error in qh are exceptionally the observed slopes. of q for large τ . 6.2. Convergence behavior for fixed τ . To illustrate the change of different local convergence ra… view at source ↗

**Figure 6.5.** Figure 6.5: Error plots for q qh ⋅ n y , q Πtr uh y , µh (solid), ⦃Πtr uh⦄ (dashed) on Γ for order q = 0, 1, 2, 3 and τ = 2 (upper row) and τ = 400 (lower row). The slope triangles indicate the slope corresponding to the behavior expected by (6.1). 7. Conclusion & Outlook. In this work, the HMDD method, a mixed domain decomposition formulation with Lehrenfeld–Sch¨oberl stabilization terms inspired by hybridized disc… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We present a domain decomposition formulation based on hybridization which is inspired by hybridized discontinuous Galerkin (HDG) methods, that enhance mixed domain decomposition methods by incorporating stabilization terms. Unlike discontinuous Galerkin methods, our analysis of the proposed finite element method is based on a corresponding consistent variational formulation and a perturbed Galerkin method. In the variational formulation the divergence appears not only within subdomains, but also as an $L^2$-surface quantity on the interfaces. Furthermore, the traces of the finite element functions on the interfaces are replaced by $L^2$-distributions. The well-posedness of the perturbed Galerkin method is shown for an appropriate choice of subspaces, in a manner similar to that of the variational formulation. For the finite element method we use Raviart-Thomas elements for the dual variable and piecewise polynomials for the primal and hybrid variables, respectively. We perform an analysis of the discretization error which is explicit in the stabilization parameter $\tau$. Numerical experiments for piecewise smooth solutions using finite element spaces of order~$q$ on curved quadrilateral meshes confirm the predicted convergence rate of $q+1$ for small values of $\tau$. In the error analysis we observe the discretization error to be uniformly bounded in $\tau$. Even for large $\tau$ values the observed convergence rates for the primal and for the hybrid variables are $q+1$. For the dual variable the convergence rate depends on the stabilization parameter and the mesh-width, with an asymptotic rate of $q+\tfrac12$.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

read the letter

This paper gives a hybridized mixed domain decomposition method with L2 interface traces and surface divergence, plus a perturbed-Galerkin analysis that tracks the stabilization parameter tau explicitly and claims uniform error bounds. The formulation replaces standard traces with L2 distributions and adds stabilization inspired by HDG, then proves well-posedness for Raviart-Thomas dual spaces paired with polynomial primal and hybrid spaces. The error analysis is written to show the discretization error stays bounded independently of tau, and the numerics on curved quadrilateral meshes back the predicted q+1 rate for small tau. Even at larger tau the primal and hybrid variables keep that order while the dual rate drops to something like q plus one-half asymptotically. The approach sits on standard mixed-method spaces and avoids circular arguments by working directly from the variational principle and the perturbed Galerkin setting. That explicit tau dependence and the uniform bound are the concrete additions worth noting. The main limitations are the standing assumptions: the analysis requires an appropriate choice of subspaces and piecewise-smooth solutions. Without the full proofs it is difficult to see how the perturbation handles every mesh configuration or whether hidden constants remain controlled, but the abstract statements line up with the reported rates and do not contradict each other. This is aimed at readers already working on domain decomposition or hybridized mixed finite elements who need a variant with controllable stabilization. A specialist extending similar codes would find the interface treatment and the tau-explicit bounds useful to test. The work is grounded enough and the claims specific enough that it deserves a serious referee rather than a desk reject.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a hybrid mixed domain decomposition method inspired by hybridized discontinuous Galerkin (HDG) techniques. It develops a consistent variational formulation in which the divergence appears as an L²-surface term on interfaces and traces of finite-element functions are replaced by L²-distributions. Well-posedness of the associated perturbed Galerkin method is established for appropriate finite-element subspaces (Raviart-Thomas elements for the dual variable and piecewise polynomials for the primal and hybrid variables). An error analysis is performed that is explicit in the stabilization parameter τ and shows the discretization error to be uniformly bounded in τ. Numerical experiments on curved quadrilateral meshes for piecewise-smooth solutions confirm the predicted convergence rate of q+1 for small τ; for large τ the primal and hybrid variables retain rate q+1 while the dual variable exhibits a τ- and h-dependent rate that asymptotically approaches q+½.

Significance. If the well-posedness and τ-explicit error bounds hold, the work supplies a variational bridge between classical mixed domain-decomposition methods and stabilized HDG formulations, with the uniform-in-τ bound offering practical guidance on stabilization-parameter selection. The explicit dependence on τ together with the numerical confirmation of the predicted rates on curved meshes constitutes a concrete, falsifiable contribution to the literature on hybridized mixed methods.

major comments (2)

[§4] §4 (Error Analysis): the uniform boundedness of the discretization error with respect to τ is asserted after the perturbation argument; the manuscript should explicitly identify the constant in the bound and verify that it remains independent of τ under the stated mesh and subspace assumptions, as this independence is load-bearing for the central claim.
[§3] §3 (Well-posedness): the proof that the perturbed Galerkin method is well-posed for the chosen Raviart-Thomas/primal/hybrid subspaces relies on an appropriate choice of spaces; the precise inf-sup constant and its dependence on the mesh curvature should be stated, because the subsequent error analysis inherits this constant.

minor comments (3)

[Introduction] The abstract and introduction cite HDG methods but do not reference the specific HDG literature on domain decomposition; adding two or three canonical citations would clarify the precise novelty.
[Numerical Experiments] Figure captions for the numerical experiments should indicate the precise range of τ values tested and the mesh sizes used, to allow direct comparison with the asymptotic statements in the error analysis.
[Variational Formulation] Notation for the interface trace operators and the L²-surface divergence term is introduced without a dedicated table; a short notation summary would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of the manuscript and the constructive comments. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the requested clarifications in the revised version.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§4] §4 (Error Analysis): the uniform boundedness of the discretization error with respect to τ is asserted after the perturbation argument; the manuscript should explicitly identify the constant in the bound and verify that it remains independent of τ under the stated mesh and subspace assumptions, as this independence is load-bearing for the central claim.

Authors: We agree that the τ-independence of the error bound merits an explicit statement. In the revised Section 4, immediately after the perturbation argument, we will identify the constant C in the bound ||error|| ≤ C · (approximation terms) and trace its dependence: C depends on the inf-sup constant β of the unperturbed formulation, the continuity constants of the bilinear forms, and the mesh-regularity parameters, but is independent of τ for any τ > 0. This follows directly from the structure of the perturbed Galerkin method and the choice of Raviart-Thomas/primal/hybrid spaces on the given meshes; no new estimates are required. A short remark will be added to make this verification transparent. revision: yes
Referee: [§3] §3 (Well-posedness): the proof that the perturbed Galerkin method is well-posed for the chosen Raviart-Thomas/primal/hybrid subspaces relies on an appropriate choice of spaces; the precise inf-sup constant and its dependence on the mesh curvature should be stated, because the subsequent error analysis inherits this constant.

Authors: The well-posedness proof in Section 3 rests on the inf-sup condition for the mixed bilinear form with the selected subspaces. In the revision we will state explicitly that the inf-sup constant β satisfies β ≥ β₀ > 0, where β₀ is independent of the mesh size h and of τ but depends on the maximum curvature of the curved quadrilateral elements (consistent with known stability results for Raviart-Thomas elements on curved meshes). We will note that this constant is inherited by the error estimates in Section 4, thereby preserving the τ-uniformity of the bounds under the manuscript’s standing assumptions on the mesh family. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper's central claims rest on a direct proof of well-posedness for the perturbed Galerkin method under an appropriate choice of subspaces (Raviart-Thomas dual, polynomial primal/hybrid) together with an explicit-in-τ discretization error analysis that establishes uniform boundedness; numerical experiments then confirm the analytically derived rates q+1. No load-bearing step reduces these results to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, a self-citation chain, or a definitional equivalence; the variational formulation (with interface divergence as L²-surface term and traces as L²-distributions) is developed independently from standard mixed/HDG techniques and remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard finite-element assumptions plus the introduction of a stabilization parameter tau whose value is not derived from first principles but chosen to ensure stability and optimal rates.

free parameters (1)

stabilization parameter tau
Introduced to enhance stability of the hybridized formulation; the error analysis is explicit in tau but tau itself is a free parameter whose optimal range is determined by numerical observation.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Appropriate choice of finite-element subspaces guarantees well-posedness of the perturbed Galerkin method
Invoked directly in the abstract for the discrete analysis, analogous to the continuous variational formulation.
domain assumption The exact solution is piecewise smooth on the given curved quadrilateral meshes
Required for the stated convergence rates of q+1.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5573 in / 1470 out tokens · 62987 ms · 2026-05-08T10:33:04.623350+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

18 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

[1]

Arbogast, L

T. Arbogast, L. C. Cowsar, M. F. Wheeler, and I. Yotov , Mixed Finite Element Methods on Nonmatching Multiblock Grids , SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 37 (2000), pp. 1295--1315, https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036142996308447

work page doi:10.1137/s0036142996308447 2000
[2]

Arbogast, G

T. Arbogast, G. Pencheva, M. F. Wheeler, and I. Yotov , A Multiscale Mortar Mixed Finite Element Method , Multiscale Model. Sim., 6 (2007), pp. 319--346, https://doi.org/10.1137/060662587

work page doi:10.1137/060662587 2007
[3]

D. N. Arnold, D. Boffi, and R. S. Falk , Quadrilateral H (div) finite elements , SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 42 (2005), pp. 2429--2451, https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036142903431924

work page doi:10.1137/s0036142903431924 2005
[4]

D. N. Arnold and F. Brezzi , Mixed and nonconforming finite element methods: implementation, postprocessing and error estimates , ESAIM: M2AN, 19 (1985), pp. 7--32

work page 1985
[5]

255--275, https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an/2010039, https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an/2010039

Bespalov, Alexei and Heuer, Norbert , A new H (div)-conforming p-interpolation operator in two dimensions , ESAIM: M2AN, 45 (2011), pp. 255--275, https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an/2010039, https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an/2010039

work page doi:10.1051/m2an/2010039 2011
[6]

Brezzi and M

F. Brezzi and M. Fortin , Mixed and hybrid finite element methods , Springer, Berlin & Heidelberg, Germany, 1991

work page 1991
[7]

B. Cockburn , Static Condensation , Hybridization , and the Devising of the HDG Methods , in Building Bridges : Connections and Challenges in Modern Approaches to Numerical Partial Differential Equations , G. R. Barrenechea, F. Brezzi, A. Cangiani, and E. H. Georgoulis, eds., vol. 114, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2016, pp. 129--177, https://d...

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-41640-3_5 2016
[8]

Cockburn , Hybridizable discontinuous Galerkin methods for second-order elliptic problems: Overview, a new result and open problems , Jpn

B. Cockburn , Hybridizable discontinuous Galerkin methods for second-order elliptic problems: Overview, a new result and open problems , Jpn. J. Ind. Appl. Math., (2023), https://doi.org/10.1007/s13160-023-00603-9

work page doi:10.1007/s13160-023-00603-9 2023
[9]

Cockburn and J

B. Cockburn and J. Gopalakrishnan , A Characterization of Hybridized Mixed Methods for Second Order Elliptic Problems , SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 42 (2004), pp. 283--301, https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036142902417893

work page doi:10.1137/s0036142902417893 2004
[10]

Cockburn, J

B. Cockburn, J. Gopalakrishnan, and R. Lazarov , Unified Hybridization of Discontinuous Galerkin , Mixed , and Continuous Galerkin Methods for Second Order Elliptic Problems , SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 47 (2009), pp. 1319--1365, https://doi.org/10.1137/070706616

work page doi:10.1137/070706616 2009
[11]

Concepts Development Team , Webpage of Numerical C ++- Library Concepts 2 , 2026, https://concepts.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de

work page 2026
[12]

Demkowicz and I

L. Demkowicz and I. Babuska , p interpolation error estimates for edge finite elements of variable order in two dimensions , SIAM J Numer Anal, 41 (2003), pp. 1195---1208

work page 2003
[13]

Fraejis de Veubeke , Displacement and equilibrium models in the finite element method , in Stress analysis , John Wiley & Sons, 1965

B. Fraejis de Veubeke , Displacement and equilibrium models in the finite element method , in Stress analysis , John Wiley & Sons, 1965

work page 1965
[14]

Glowinski and M

R. Glowinski and M. Wheeler , Domain decomposition and mixed finite element methods for ellipitic problems , in First International Symposium on Domain Decomposition Methods for Partial Dierential Equations, SIAM, Philadelphia, 1988, pp. 144--172

work page 1988
[15]

Modave and T

A. Modave and T. Chaumont-Frelet , A hybridizable discontinuous galerkin method with characteristic variables for helmholtz problems , J. Comput. Phys., 493 (2023), p. 112459, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2023.112459, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021999123005545

work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2023.112459 2023
[16]

A. F. M. ter Elst, M. Meyries, and J. Rehberg , Parabolic equations with dynamical boundary conditions and source terms on interfaces , Ann. Mat. Pura Appl., 193 (2014), pp. 1295--1318, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10231-013-0329-7

work page doi:10.1007/s10231-013-0329-7 2014
[17]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry add.period write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1 'skip if FUNCTION new.block.checka empty 'skip 'new.block if FUNCTION field.or.null duplicate empty pop "" 'skip ...

work page
[18]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry add.period write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1 'skip if FUNCTION new.block.checka empty 'skip 'new.block if FUNCTION field.or.null duplicate empty pop "" 'skip ...

work page

[1] [1]

Arbogast, L

T. Arbogast, L. C. Cowsar, M. F. Wheeler, and I. Yotov , Mixed Finite Element Methods on Nonmatching Multiblock Grids , SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 37 (2000), pp. 1295--1315, https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036142996308447

work page doi:10.1137/s0036142996308447 2000

[2] [2]

Arbogast, G

T. Arbogast, G. Pencheva, M. F. Wheeler, and I. Yotov , A Multiscale Mortar Mixed Finite Element Method , Multiscale Model. Sim., 6 (2007), pp. 319--346, https://doi.org/10.1137/060662587

work page doi:10.1137/060662587 2007

[3] [3]

D. N. Arnold, D. Boffi, and R. S. Falk , Quadrilateral H (div) finite elements , SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 42 (2005), pp. 2429--2451, https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036142903431924

work page doi:10.1137/s0036142903431924 2005

[4] [4]

D. N. Arnold and F. Brezzi , Mixed and nonconforming finite element methods: implementation, postprocessing and error estimates , ESAIM: M2AN, 19 (1985), pp. 7--32

work page 1985

[5] [5]

255--275, https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an/2010039, https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an/2010039

Bespalov, Alexei and Heuer, Norbert , A new H (div)-conforming p-interpolation operator in two dimensions , ESAIM: M2AN, 45 (2011), pp. 255--275, https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an/2010039, https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an/2010039

work page doi:10.1051/m2an/2010039 2011

[6] [6]

Brezzi and M

F. Brezzi and M. Fortin , Mixed and hybrid finite element methods , Springer, Berlin & Heidelberg, Germany, 1991

work page 1991

[7] [7]

B. Cockburn , Static Condensation , Hybridization , and the Devising of the HDG Methods , in Building Bridges : Connections and Challenges in Modern Approaches to Numerical Partial Differential Equations , G. R. Barrenechea, F. Brezzi, A. Cangiani, and E. H. Georgoulis, eds., vol. 114, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2016, pp. 129--177, https://d...

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-41640-3_5 2016

[8] [8]

Cockburn , Hybridizable discontinuous Galerkin methods for second-order elliptic problems: Overview, a new result and open problems , Jpn

B. Cockburn , Hybridizable discontinuous Galerkin methods for second-order elliptic problems: Overview, a new result and open problems , Jpn. J. Ind. Appl. Math., (2023), https://doi.org/10.1007/s13160-023-00603-9

work page doi:10.1007/s13160-023-00603-9 2023

[9] [9]

Cockburn and J

B. Cockburn and J. Gopalakrishnan , A Characterization of Hybridized Mixed Methods for Second Order Elliptic Problems , SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 42 (2004), pp. 283--301, https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036142902417893

work page doi:10.1137/s0036142902417893 2004

[10] [10]

Cockburn, J

B. Cockburn, J. Gopalakrishnan, and R. Lazarov , Unified Hybridization of Discontinuous Galerkin , Mixed , and Continuous Galerkin Methods for Second Order Elliptic Problems , SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 47 (2009), pp. 1319--1365, https://doi.org/10.1137/070706616

work page doi:10.1137/070706616 2009

[11] [11]

Concepts Development Team , Webpage of Numerical C ++- Library Concepts 2 , 2026, https://concepts.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de

work page 2026

[12] [12]

Demkowicz and I

L. Demkowicz and I. Babuska , p interpolation error estimates for edge finite elements of variable order in two dimensions , SIAM J Numer Anal, 41 (2003), pp. 1195---1208

work page 2003

[13] [13]

Fraejis de Veubeke , Displacement and equilibrium models in the finite element method , in Stress analysis , John Wiley & Sons, 1965

B. Fraejis de Veubeke , Displacement and equilibrium models in the finite element method , in Stress analysis , John Wiley & Sons, 1965

work page 1965

[14] [14]

Glowinski and M

R. Glowinski and M. Wheeler , Domain decomposition and mixed finite element methods for ellipitic problems , in First International Symposium on Domain Decomposition Methods for Partial Dierential Equations, SIAM, Philadelphia, 1988, pp. 144--172

work page 1988

[15] [15]

Modave and T

A. Modave and T. Chaumont-Frelet , A hybridizable discontinuous galerkin method with characteristic variables for helmholtz problems , J. Comput. Phys., 493 (2023), p. 112459, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2023.112459, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021999123005545

work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2023.112459 2023

[16] [16]

A. F. M. ter Elst, M. Meyries, and J. Rehberg , Parabolic equations with dynamical boundary conditions and source terms on interfaces , Ann. Mat. Pura Appl., 193 (2014), pp. 1295--1318, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10231-013-0329-7

work page doi:10.1007/s10231-013-0329-7 2014

[17] [17]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry add.period write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1 'skip if FUNCTION new.block.checka empty 'skip 'new.block if FUNCTION field.or.null duplicate empty pop "" 'skip ...

work page

[18] [18]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry add.period write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1 'skip if FUNCTION new.block.checka empty 'skip 'new.block if FUNCTION field.or.null duplicate empty pop "" 'skip ...

work page