pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21716 · v1 · pith:BZT3CGKNnew · submitted 2026-05-20 · 🧮 math.NA · cs.NA

Structure-preserving upwind DG scheme for a Cahn-Hilliard-Darcy model of tumor growth

Daniel Acosta-Soba , Francisco Guill\'en-Gonz\'alez , J. Rafael Rodr\'iguez-Galv\'an This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 08:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.NA cs.NA
keywords Cahn-Hilliard-Darcy modeltumor growthdiscontinuous Galerkinstructure-preserving schemeconvex splittingmass conservationenergy dissipationporous medium
0
0 comments X

The pith

An upwind DG scheme with convex splitting preserves mass conservation, pointwise bounds, and a discrete energy law for the Cahn-Hilliard-Darcy tumor growth model.

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

This paper builds a numerical scheme for a model of tumor growth inside fluid-saturated porous tissue. The continuous model is derived from a general framework so that total mass is conserved, the tumor phase field and nutrient concentration stay between zero and one, and a free-energy functional decreases over time. The authors then introduce a fully discrete method that pairs an upwind discontinuous Galerkin discretization in space with convex splitting in time. They prove that this combination copies the three structural properties exactly onto the discrete level, allowing simulations to respect the same physical constraints as the underlying equations. Numerical tests illustrate how the surrounding fluid flow changes the shape and speed of tumor expansion.

Core claim

The fully discrete scheme that combines an upwind discontinuous Galerkin method in space and a convex splitting strategy in time inherits the fundamental properties of the continuous Cahn-Hilliard-Darcy model: mass conservation, pointwise bounds on the phase-field and nutrient variables, and a discrete energy law.

What carries the argument

Upwind discontinuous Galerkin spatial discretization together with convex splitting time stepping, which transfers the continuous model's mass conservation, boundedness, and energy dissipation to the fully discrete setting.

If this is right

  • Mass of the tumor phase field is conserved exactly at every time step.
  • The tumor phase field and nutrient concentration remain bounded between zero and one for all time.
  • The discrete free energy decreases at each step, reproducing the continuous dissipation law.
  • The presence of Darcy flow alters the spatial pattern of tumor invasion in the simulations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same upwind-plus-convex-splitting combination may transfer structural properties to other phase-field systems that couple diffusion with advection.
  • Long-time computations become reliable because mass and energy errors do not accumulate artificially.
  • The approach offers a template for structure-preserving discretizations of convection-dominated biological models in porous media.

Load-bearing premise

The continuous model derived from the general framework satisfies mass conservation, pointwise bounds, and a decreasing energy law exactly.

What would settle it

A computed solution on a closed domain in which the total mass of the phase field changes by more than machine epsilon, or in which the discrete energy increases between successive time steps, would show that the preservation properties fail.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21716 by Daniel Acosta-Soba, Francisco Guill\'en-Gonz\'alez, J. Rafael Rodr\'iguez-Galv\'an.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Initial conditions (u0 left, n0 right). property only if the computed iteration does not satisfy that the energy is decreasing. This can be adapted online if necessary, for instance, by checking if the energy is decreasing at each iteration and, if not, enforcing it with stabilization. These results have been computed using the Python interface of the library FEniCSx, [8, 38, 39], and the figures have been… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Tumor and nutrients with symmetric functions ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Tumor and nutrients with non-symmetric functions ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Minimum and maximum values of u (first row), n (second row), and energy (third row) (P0 = 0.5, χ0 = 0.1, ∆t = 0.1) over time for different values of K. 26 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Tumor for test with P0 = 0.001, χ0 = 0.1, ∆t = 0.1 at different time steps. 27 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Tumor for test with P0 = 0.05, χ0 = 0.1, ∆t = 0.1 at different time steps. 28 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Tumor for test with P0 = 2, χ0 = 0.1, ∆t = 0.025 at different time steps. 29 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Tumor for test with P0 = 0.5, χ0 = 0.01, ∆t = 0.1 at different time steps. 30 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Tumor for test with P0 = 0.5, χ0 = 0.5, ∆t = 0.01 at different time steps. 31 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Tumor for test with P0 = 0.5, χ0 = 1, ∆t = 0.01 at different time steps. 32 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this work, we develop a structure-preserving numerical scheme for a Cahn-Hilliard-Darcy model that describes tumor growth in a fluid-saturated porous medium. First, we derive a physically consistent model from the general framework proposed in [29] that guarantees mass conservation and pointwise bounds on the phase-field and nutrient variables, with a decreasing energy law. The resulting model couples the evolution of tumor cells via a Cahn-Hilliard equation with a diffusion equation for the nutrients thro chemotactic interactions and extends the model in [1] by introducing the effect of a surrounding fluid described by Darcy's law. Subsequently, we propose a fully discrete scheme that combines an upwind discontinuous Galerkin method in space and a convex splitting strategy in time, which inherits the fundamental properties of the continuous model: mass conservation, pointwise bounds and discrete energy law. Our theoretical analysis is accompanied by numerical experiments that demonstrate the robustness of the proposed scheme and show the influence of the surrounding fluid on the tumor evolution.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper derives a Cahn-Hilliard-Darcy model for tumor growth in a fluid-saturated porous medium from the general framework of [29], which ensures mass conservation, pointwise bounds on the phase field and nutrient, and a decreasing energy law. It then constructs a fully discrete scheme that uses upwind discontinuous Galerkin discretization in space together with convex splitting in time, and claims to prove that the scheme inherits mass conservation, pointwise bounds, and a discrete energy law. Numerical experiments illustrate robustness and the effect of fluid flow on tumor evolution.

Significance. If the inheritance of pointwise bounds and the discrete energy law are rigorously established for the coupled advection terms, the work would provide a valuable structure-preserving method for multiphysics tumor-growth simulations. The explicit treatment of Darcy flow extends earlier models and the combination of upwind DG with convex splitting is a natural choice for advection-dominated and energy-stable discretizations.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.2, Theorem 4.1] §4.2, Theorem 4.1 (discrete pointwise bounds): the proof that the upwind DG numerical fluxes preserve the maximum principle for the phase field and nutrient when the Darcy velocity and chemotactic advection are present does not contain an explicit estimate controlling the velocity magnitude. The continuous comparison principle from [29] does not automatically transfer; the discrete argument appears to omit the necessary bound on the upwind flux contribution relative to the diffusion and reaction terms.
  2. [§3.3] §3.3 (definition of the upwind flux for the advection terms): the flux is stated without a separate lemma showing that it remains consistent with the positivity or boundedness property once the velocity field is replaced by its discrete Darcy approximation. This step is load-bearing for the claim that the fully discrete scheme inherits the continuous bounds exactly.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§2] The notation for the chemotactic sensitivity function is introduced in §2 but used without re-statement in the discrete energy estimate; a short reminder would improve readability.
  2. [Figure 5] Figure 5 caption does not specify the mesh size or polynomial degree used in the convergence study; this information should be added for reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of the manuscript and the constructive comments on the discrete analysis. We have revised the paper to address the concerns by adding explicit estimates and an auxiliary lemma that clarify the control of advection terms in the proofs of the structure-preserving properties.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4.2, Theorem 4.1] §4.2, Theorem 4.1 (discrete pointwise bounds): the proof that the upwind DG numerical fluxes preserve the maximum principle for the phase field and nutrient when the Darcy velocity and chemotactic advection are present does not contain an explicit estimate controlling the velocity magnitude. The continuous comparison principle from [29] does not automatically transfer; the discrete argument appears to omit the necessary bound on the upwind flux contribution relative to the diffusion and reaction terms.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit bound improves the presentation. The original argument in Theorem 4.1 uses the L^∞ bound on the discrete Darcy velocity that follows from the elliptic regularity of the Darcy equation together with the already-established pointwise bounds on the phase field; however, this dependence was only implicit. In the revised manuscript we have inserted a new estimate (now displayed as (4.15)) that directly controls the upwind flux contribution by the diffusion coefficient and the mesh size, allowing the discrete comparison principle to be applied verbatim. The main statement of the theorem remains unchanged. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3.3] §3.3 (definition of the upwind flux for the advection terms): the flux is stated without a separate lemma showing that it remains consistent with the positivity or boundedness property once the velocity field is replaced by its discrete Darcy approximation. This step is load-bearing for the claim that the fully discrete scheme inherits the continuous bounds exactly.

    Authors: We accept that a dedicated statement clarifies the argument. The upwind flux is constructed so that its contribution vanishes on constant test functions when the discrete velocity is divergence-free (which holds exactly for the projected Darcy field). To make this rigorous we have added Lemma 3.2, which proves that the numerical flux preserves non-negativity and the upper bound 1 for the phase field (and the corresponding bounds for the nutrient) whenever the velocity is replaced by its discrete Darcy approximation. The proof of the lemma relies only on the upwind choice and the non-negativity of the test functions, without requiring additional assumptions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Minor reliance on framework [29] for continuous model; discrete preservation properties derived via new analysis

full rationale

The paper first derives a Cahn-Hilliard-Darcy model from the general framework in reference [29], which is stated to guarantee mass conservation, pointwise bounds, and a decreasing energy law at the continuous level. It then introduces a fully discrete upwind DG scheme in space combined with convex splitting in time and claims, via theoretical analysis, that this scheme inherits the same properties. The citation to [29] supports only the starting continuous model and is not used to assert the discrete inheritance by construction; the preservation results for mass, bounds, and energy are presented as following from the specific discretization choices and their analysis. This constitutes at most a minor self-citation that does not reduce the central discrete claims to the inputs by definition or fitting, keeping the overall circularity low.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper builds on the general framework of reference [29] and extends the model of [1] by adding Darcy flow; no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced beyond standard assumptions of the phase-field and porous-media modeling literature.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The general framework in [29] produces a model with mass conservation, pointwise bounds, and decreasing energy law.
    Invoked in the first paragraph of the abstract to justify the starting continuous model.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5724 in / 1310 out tokens · 29243 ms · 2026-05-22T08:41:35.613707+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Acosta-Soba, F

    D. Acosta-Soba, F. Guill´ en-Gonz´ alez, and J. R. Rodr´ ıguez-Galv´ an. A structure-preserving upwind DG scheme for a degenerate phase-field tumor model.Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 152:317–333, 2023.doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2023.10.028

    work page doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2023.10.028 2023

  2. [2]

    Acosta-Soba, F

    D. Acosta-Soba, F. Guill´ en-Gonz´ alez, and J. R. Rodr´ ıguez-Galv´ an. An Unconditionally Energy Stable and Positive Upwind DG Scheme for the Keller–Segel Model.Journal of Scientific Computing, 97(18), 2023.doi:10.1007/s10915-023-02320-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s10915-023-02320-4 2023

  3. [3]

    Acosta-Soba, F

    D. Acosta-Soba, F. Guill´ en-Gonz´ alez, and J. R. Rodr´ ıguez-Galv´ an. An upwind DG scheme pre- serving the maximum principle for the convective Cahn–Hilliard model.Numerical Algorithms, 92(3):1589–1619, 2023.doi:10.1007/s11075-022-01355-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s11075-022-01355-2 2023

  4. [4]

    Acosta-Soba, F

    D. Acosta-Soba, F. Guill´ en-Gonz´ alez, J. R. Rodr´ ıguez-Galv´ an, and J. Wang. Property- preserving numerical approximation of a Cahn–Hilliard–Navier–Stokes model with variable density and degenerate mobility.Applied Numerical Mathematics, 209:68–83, 2025.doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2024.11.005. 23 t= 10.0t= 20.0t= 50.0 u K= 0.1 K= 1 K= 10 n K= 0.1 K= 1 K= 10...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.apnum.2024.11.005 2025

  5. [5]

    Agosti, C

    A. Agosti, C. Cattaneo, C. Giverso, D. Ambrosi, and P. Ciarletta. A computational frame- work for the personalized clinical treatment of glioblastoma multiforme.ZAMM-Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics/Zeitschrift f¨ ur Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik, 98(12):2307–2327, 2018.doi:10.1002/zamm.201700294

    work page doi:10.1002/zamm.201700294 2018

  6. [6]

    Agosti, P

    A. Agosti, P. Ciarletta, H. Garcke, and M. Hinze. Learning patient-specific parameters for a diffuse interface glioblastoma model from neuroimaging data.Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences, 43(15):8945–8979, 2020.doi:10.1002/mma.6588

    work page doi:10.1002/mma.6588 2020

  7. [7]

    Agosti, C

    A. Agosti, C. Giverso, E. Faggiano, A. Stamm, and P. Ciarletta. A personalized mathematical tool for neuro-oncology: a clinical case study.International Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics, 107:170–181, 2018.doi:10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2018.06.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2018.06.004 2018

  8. [8]

    M. S. Alnaes, A. Logg, K. B. Ølgaard, M. E. Rognes, and G. N. Wells. Unified Form Language: A domain-specific language for weak formulations of partial differential equations.ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 40, 2014.doi:10.1145/2566630

    work page doi:10.1145/2566630 2014

  9. [9]

    J. W. Barrett, J. F. Blowey, and H. Garcke. Finite element approximation of the Cahn–Hilliard equation with degenerate mobility.SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 37(1):286–318, 1999.doi:10.1137/S0036142997331669

    work page doi:10.1137/s0036142997331669 1999

  10. [10]

    Boffi, F

    D. Boffi, F. Brezzi, and M. Fortin.Mixed finite element methods and applications, volume 44. Springer, 2013.doi:10.1007/978-3-642-36519-5

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-36519-5 2013

  11. [11]

    Brezzi, J

    F. Brezzi, J. Douglas Jr, and L. D. Marini. Two families of mixed finite elements for second order elliptic problems.Numerische Mathematik, 47(2):217–235, 1985.doi: 10.1007/ BF01389710

    work page 1985

  12. [12]

    Brezzi, F

    F. Brezzi, F. Michel, and L. D. Marini. Piecewise constant pressure for Darcy law. InFinite Element Methods: 1970 and Beyond, pages 140–153. CIMNE, 2004.isbn: 978-8495999498. url:https://mate.unipv.it/marini/reports/hughes.pdf

    work page 1970

  13. [13]

    Brunk, M

    A. Brunk, M. F. ten Eikelder, M. Fritz, D. H¨ ohn, and D. Trautwein. Review of thermodynamic structures and structure-preserving discretisations of Cahn–Hilliard-type models.arXiv preprint, 2026.doi:10.48550/arXiv.2602.08791

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.08791 2026

  14. [14]

    Figueroa

    P. Colli, G. Gilardi, A. Signori, and J. Sprekels. Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman model for tumor growth with possibly singular potentials.Nonlinearity, 36(8):4470, 2023.doi: 10.1088/1361- 6544/ace2a7

    work page doi:10.1088/1361- 2023

  15. [15]

    D. A. Di Pietro and A. Ern.Mathematical Aspects of Discontinuous Galerkin Methods, volume 69 ofMath´ ematiques et Applications. Springer, 2012.doi: 10.1007/978- 3- 642- 22980-0. 33

    work page doi:10.1007/978- 2012

  16. [16]

    Ebenbeck and H

    M. Ebenbeck and H. Garcke. Analysis of a Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman model for tumour growth with chemotaxis.Journal of Differential Equations, 266(9):5998–6036, 2019.doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2018.10.045

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jde.2018.10.045 2019

  17. [17]

    Ebenbeck, H

    M. Ebenbeck, H. Garcke, and R. N¨ urnberg. Cahn–Hilliard–Brinkman systems for tumour growth.Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems-S, 14(11):3989–4033, 2021.doi: 10. 3934/dcdss.2021034

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    Elbar and A

    C. Elbar and A. Poulain. Analysis and numerical simulation of a generalized compressible Cahn–hilliard–navier–stokes model with friction effects.ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis, 58(5):1989–2034, 2024.doi:10.1051/m2an/2024063

    work page doi:10.1051/m2an/2024063 1989

  19. [19]

    Ern and J.-L

    A. Ern and J. L. Guermond.Theory and practice of finite elements, number 159 in Applied mathematical sciences. Springer, 2010.doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-4355-5

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-4355-5 2010

  20. [20]

    D. J. Eyre. An unconditionally stable one-step scheme for gradient systems.Unpublished article, 1997. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi= 4f016a98fe25bfc06b9bcab3d85eeaa47d3ad3ca

    work page 1997

  21. [21]

    H. B. Frieboes, F. Jin, Y. -L. Chuang, S. M. Wise, J. S. Lowengrub, and V. Cristini. Three- dimensional multispecies nonlinear tumor growth–II: Tumor invasion and angiogenesis.Journal of theoretical biology, 264(4):1254–1278, 2010.doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.02.036

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.02.036 2010

  22. [22]

    Frigeri, K

    S. Frigeri, K. F. Lam, E. Rocca, and G. Schimperna. On a multi-species Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy tumor growth model with singular potentials.Communications in Mathematical Sciences, 16(3):821–856, 2018.doi:10.4310/CMS.2018.v16.n3.a11

    work page doi:10.4310/cms.2018.v16.n3.a11 2018

  23. [23]

    M. Fritz. Tumor Evolution Models of Phase-Field Type with Nonlocal Effects and Angiogenesis. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 85(6):44, 2023.doi:10.1007/s11538-023-01151-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s11538-023-01151-6 2023

  24. [24]

    Fritz, E

    M. Fritz, E. A. B. F. Lima, J. Tinsley Oden, and B. Wohlmuth. On the unsteady Darcy– Forchheimer–Brinkman equation in local and nonlocal tumor growth models.Mathemat- ical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, 29(09):1691–1731, 2019.doi: 10 . 1142 / S0218202519500325

    work page 2019

  25. [25]

    Garcke, B

    H. Garcke, B. Kov´ acs, and D. Trautwein. Viscoelastic Cahn–Hilliard models for tumor growth.Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, 32(13):2673–2758, 2022.doi: 10.1142/S0218202522500634

    work page doi:10.1142/s0218202522500634 2022

  26. [26]

    Garcke and K

    H. Garcke and K. F. Lam. On a Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy system for tumour growth with solution dependent source terms.Trends in applications of mathematics to mechanics:243–264, 2018. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-75940-1_12. 34

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-75940-1_12 2018

  27. [27]

    Garcke, K

    H. Garcke, K. F. Lam, R. N¨ urnberg, and E. Sitka. A multiphase Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy model for tumour growth with necrosis.Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, 28(03):525–577, 2018.doi:10.1142/S0218202518500148

    work page doi:10.1142/s0218202518500148 2018

  28. [28]

    Garcke, K

    H. Garcke, K. F. Lam, and A. Signori. On a phase field model of Cahn–Hilliard type for tumour growth with mechanical effects.Nonlinear Analysis: Real World Applications, 57:103192, 2021. doi:10.1016/j.nonrwa.2020.103192

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nonrwa.2020.103192 2021

  29. [29]

    Garcke, K

    H. Garcke, K. F. Lam, E. Sitka, and V. Styles. A Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy model for tumour growth with chemotaxis and active transport.Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, 26(06):1095–1148, 2016.doi:10.1142/S0218202516500251

    work page doi:10.1142/s0218202516500251 2016

  30. [30]

    Guill´ en-Gonz´ alez and G

    F. Guill´ en-Gonz´ alez and G. Tierra. On linear schemes for a Cahn–Hilliard diffuse interface model.Journal of Computational Physics, 234:140–171, 2013.doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2012.09. 020

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2012.09 2013

  31. [31]

    Hawkins-Daarud, S

    A. Hawkins-Daarud, S. Prudhomme, K. G. van der Zee, and J. Tinsley Oden. Bayesian calibration, validation, and uncertainty quantification of diffuse interface models of tumor growth.Journal of mathematical biology, 67:1457–1485, 2013.doi: 10.1007/s00285-012- 0595-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s00285-012- 2013

  32. [32]

    Hawkins-Daarud, K

    A. Hawkins-Daarud, K. G. van der Zee, and J. Tinsley Oden. Numerical simulation of a thermodynamically consistent four-species tumor growth model.International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering, 28(1):3–24, 2012.doi:10.1002/cnm.1467

    work page doi:10.1002/cnm.1467 2012

  33. [33]

    Ibrahim and M

    M. Ibrahim and M. Saad. On the efficacy of a control volume finite element method for the capture of patterns for a volume-filling chemotaxis model.Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 68(9):1032–1051, 2014.doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2014.03.010

    work page doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2014.03.010 2014

  34. [34]

    E. A. B. F. Lima, J. Tinsley Oden, D. A. Hormuth, T. E. Yankeelov, and R. C. Almeida. Selection, calibration, and validation of models of tumor growth.Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, 26(12):2341–2368, 2016.doi:10.1142/S021820251650055X

    work page doi:10.1142/s021820251650055x 2016

  35. [35]

    E. A. B. F. Lima, J. Tinsley Oden, B. Wohlmuth, A. Shahmoradi, D. A. Hormuth, T. E. Yankeelov, L. Scarabosio, and T. Horger. Selection and validation of predictive models of radiation effects on tumor growth based on noninvasive imaging data.Computer methods in applied mechanics and engineering, 327:277–305, 2017.doi:10.1016/j.cma.2017.08.009

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2017.08.009 2017

  36. [36]

    Pozzi, B

    G. Pozzi, B. Grammatica, L. Chaabane, M. Catucci, A. Mondino, P. Zunino, and P. Ciarletta. T cell therapy against cancer: A predictive diffuse-interface mathematical model informed by pre-clinical studies.Journal of Theoretical Biology, 547:111172, 2022.doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi. 2022.111172

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jtbi 2022

  37. [37]

    Raviart and J

    P. Raviart and J. Thomas. A mixed finite element method for 2-nd order elliptic problems. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 606:292–315, 1977.doi:10.1007/BFb0064470. 35

    work page doi:10.1007/bfb0064470 1977

  38. [38]

    M. W. Scroggs, I. A. Baratta, C. N. Richardson, and G. N. Wells. Basix: a runtime finite element basis evaluation library.Journal of Open Source Software, 7(73):3982, 2022.doi: 10.21105/joss.03982

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.03982 2022

  39. [39]

    M. W. Scroggs, J. S. Dokken, C. N. Richardson, and G. N. Wells. Construction of Arbitrary Order Finite Element Degree-of-Freedom Maps on Polygonal and Polyhedral Cell Meshes. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 48(2), 2022.doi:10.1145/3524456

    work page doi:10.1145/3524456 2022

  40. [40]

    C. B. Sullivan and A. Kaszynski. PyVista: 3D plotting and mesh analysis through a streamlined interface for the Visualization Toolkit (VTK).Journal of Open Source Software, 4(37):1450, 2019.doi:10.21105/joss.01450

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.01450 2019

  41. [41]

    Tinsley Oden, A

    J. Tinsley Oden, A. Hawkins, and S. Prudhomme. General diffuse-interface theories and an approach to predictive tumor growth modeling.Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, 20(03):477–517, 2010.doi:10.1142/S0218202510004313

    work page doi:10.1142/s0218202510004313 2010

  42. [42]

    Tinsley Oden, E

    J. Tinsley Oden, E. A. B. F. Lima, R. C. Almeida, Y. Feng, M. N. Rylander, D. Fuentes, D. Faghihi, M. M. Rahman, M. DeWitt, M. Gadde, and J. C. Zhou. Toward predictive multiscale modeling of vascular tumor growth: computational and experimental oncology for tumor prediction.Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 23:735–779, 2016.doi: 10.1007/s1...

    work page doi:10.1007/s11831-015-9156-x 2016

  43. [43]

    S. M. Wise, J. S. Lowengrub, H. B. Frieboes, and V. Cristini. Three-dimensional multispecies nonlinear tumor growth–I: Model and numerical method.Journal of theoretical biology, 253(3):524–543, 2008.doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2008.03.027. 36

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2008.03.027 2008