Simplified Weak Galerkin Methods for Linear Elasticity on Nonconvex Domains

Chunmei Wang; Shangyou Zhang

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Simplified Weak Galerkin Methods for Linear Elasticity on Nonconvex Domains

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that a bubble-function-enriched weak Galerkin method solves linear elasticity on nonconvex polygonal and polyhedral meshes at optimal convergence rates, with no stabilizer terms needed.

desk verdict Plausible extension of stabilizer-free WG to elasticity on nonconvex polytopes, but the central stability proof is deferred to unpublished preprints and the geometry of the bubble functions is not fully settled; still deserves refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.17879 v1 pith:VBUAMOS2 submitted 2024-11-26 math.NA cs.NA

Chunmei Wang , Shangyou Zhang This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.NAcs.NA MSC 65N3065N1565N1265N20

keywords weakGalerkinfiniteelementmethodlinearelasticitystabilizer-freebubblefunctionsnonconvexpolytopalmesheserrorestimatesdiscretestraintensordivergence

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 aims to show that the weak Galerkin finite element method for linear elasticity can be stripped of its usual stabilization terms and still be stable and optimally accurate on meshes whose cells need not be convex. The authors construct discrete weak strain and discrete weak divergence operators using higher-degree polynomial spaces, then use bubble functions to prove the resulting stabilizer-free bilinear form is coercive in a discrete $H^{1}$ norm. For an exact solution in $H^{{k+1}}$, they prove errors of order h^k in the discrete energy norm, and order $h^{{k+α}}$ in $L^{2}$ when the dual problem has $H^{{1+α}}$ regularity. The payoff is a simpler, symmetric, positive-definite linear system that works on general polygonal and polyhedral meshes, including nonconvex ones. This matters because existing stabilizer-free WG treatments required convex cells, while standard WG methods carry an extra programming and theoretical burden for stabilizers.

What carries the argument

The central object is the element bubble function $\Phi_B = \ell_1^2 \ell_2^2 \cdots \ell_N^2$, built from squared affine functions that vanish on each face of an N-faced polytopal element, together with its face-based sibling $\phi_{e_i} = \prod_{k \neq i} \ell_k^2$. These functions vanish on the element boundary, which removes the boundary terms in the integration-by-parts identities (2.2) and (2.4), and each is bounded below on a subdomain, which lets the domain inverse inequality convert weak-strain control into true-strain control. The face-based bubble function isolates one face at a time, so the boundary discrepancy $v_0 - v_b$ on every face is controlled; combined with reverse trace inequalities, this produces the two-sided norm equivalence of Lemma 4.5, the load-bearing stability estimate of the whole scheme.

What would settle it

On a single nonconvex polygonal cell, compute the quotient $\inf_{v_0} \|\epsilon_w(v)\| / \|\epsilon(v_0)\|$ over nonzero interior polynomials with $v_b = 0$; Lemma 4.1 predicts a positive lower bound uniform over a mesh sequence, so any sequence of cells whose reentrant angle approaches $360^\circ$ and drives this quotient to zero would falsify the stability claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that bubble functions, meaning polynomials that vanish on the boundary of each polytopal cell, make the stabilizer-free WG method for linear elasticity coercive without any convexity condition on the mesh. Choosing test functions of the form $\Phi_B \epsilon(v_0)$ in the discrete weak strain identity and $\Phi_B (\nabla \cdot v_0)$ in the discrete weak divergence identity forces the boundary terms to vanish, so the true strain and divergence of the interior component $v_0$ are bounded by the weak strain and weak divergence of the pair $\{v_0, v_b\}$. An edge-based bubble function then transfers the boundary mismatch $v_0 - v_b$ into the same bound, yielding the norm equivalence $C_1\|v\|_{1,h} \le |\!|\!|v|\!|\!| \le C_2\|v\|_{1,h}$ of Lemma 4.5. From that norm equivalence the uniqueness proof, the error equation, and the optimal-order estimates follow: Theorem 6.3 gives $|\!|\!|u - u_h|\!|\!| \le C h^k \|u\|_{k+1}$ in the discrete $H^{1}$ norm, and Theorem 7.1 gives $\|u_0 - u_{0,h}\| \le C h^{k+\alpha} \|u\|_{k+1}$ in the $L^{2}$ norm under the stated dual regularity.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the bubble-function norm equivalence of Lemma 4.5 holds with constants independent of the element, uniformly for nonconvex polytopal cells, and the proofs of the underlying polynomial-extension lemmas are deferred to companion preprints.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

On any shape-regular polytopal mesh, including meshes with nonconvex polygonal and polyhedral cells, Algorithm 3.1 is well-posed: it has a unique solution for every $\lambda \geq 0$ and produces a symmetric positive-definite linear system.
For an exact solution in $[H^{k+1}(\Omega)]^d$, the $P_k$ version converges at order $k+1$ in $L^2$ under dual regularity and at order $k$ in the discrete energy norm, matching the optimal rates for such elements.
Because no stabilizer parameter enters the formulation, the method avoids parameter tuning and retains the sparsity pattern of standard weak Galerkin discretizations.
The numerical experiments reported in the paper show the predicted orders of convergence on nonconvex polygonal and polyhedral meshes, with errors essentially independent of the Lamé parameter $\lambda$ in the tested cases.

Reading between the lines

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

The same bubble-function machinery is likely transferable to other stabilizer-free weak Galerkin formulations, such as Stokes, Maxwell, or fourth-order problems on nonconvex polytopal meshes, because the norm-equivalence mechanism is geometric rather than specific to elasticity.
Since the only mesh-dependent construction is the face-distance bubble function, the scheme may combine naturally with adaptive or hp-refinement, where reentrant cells are common, although the cost of the higher-degree weak-derivative spaces would need to be weighed in practice.
A formal analysis of how the constants in Theorems 6.3 and 7.1 depend on $\lambda$ would settle whether the observed pressure independence holds uniformly as $\lambda \to \infty$, which the present statements do not claim.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

You should know two things about this paper. First, it does something genuinely useful: it extends stabilizer-free weak Galerkin methods to linear elasticity on nonconvex polytopal meshes, using bubble functions to handle both the strain and divergence terms. The method is symmetric, positive definite, and needs no stabilizers. Second, the central stability argument is not self-contained. Lemma 4.5, the norm equivalence that carries the whole error analysis, rests on a domain inverse inequality and two polynomial-extension lemmas whose proofs are deferred to the authors' preprints [36,37]. One of those preprints does not even have an arXiv number. So the paper's main claim—free from convexity constraints—is only as solid as those unpublished results.

What the paper does well: the overall structure is standard WG machinery, and the error estimates in Theorems 6.3 and 7.1 are the right target. The numerical experiments on nonconvex polygonal and polyhedral meshes show clean optimal convergence rates and pressure robustness, which is encouraging evidence that the method actually works. The authors also honestly flag, in Remark 4.3, that some nonconvex configurations need extra techniques, and they point to the preprints.

The soft spots are real but not fatal if the deferred lemmas hold. The stress-test worry about Lemma 4.5 is legitimate: on a nonconvex polytope, a face-supporting hyperplane can pass through the element interior, so the squared bubble product may vanish inside the element, and the uniform positivity needed for (4.6) is not a consequence of standard shape regularity. The paper does not address this. The finite-dimensional argument gives a constant that depends on the distance from an interior subdomain to the supporting hyperplanes, and no uniform control is proved or cited for nonconvex cells. A referee will need to see those proofs.

There are also two numerical table issues. In Table 2(b), grid 6 shows an error of 0.135E-03 with order 0.0, which is inconsistent with the surrounding rows and should be explained. Table 5 is labeled P3/P4 WG, but the convergence rates are 1 and 2, so the labels are almost certainly wrong. These are minor, but they should be fixed.

Who is this for? Researchers working on WG or polytopal finite element methods. The idea is coherent and the method is likely correct, but the paper does not fully stand alone. I would send it to peer review, with the requirement that the authors either include the deferred lemmas or make the preprints publicly available and convincing, and that they address the nonconvex bubble geometry explicitly. Not a desk reject, but not a quick accept either.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a stabilizer-free weak Galerkin (WG) finite element method for linear elasticity on polytopal meshes, claiming validity on nonconvex meshes through the use of bubble functions. The method uses the standard weak strain and weak divergence operators, and the bilinear form contains no explicit stabilization terms. The authors state optimal-order error estimates in the discrete H1 norm and in the L2 norm (Theorems 6.3 and 7.1), under regularity assumptions, and support these claims with numerical experiments on convex and nonconvex polygonal/polyhedral meshes. The main novelty asserted is the removal of convexity constraints for stabilizer-free WG methods, achieved via polynomial bubble functions and associated norm equivalences.

Significance. If the central technical lemmas were valid, the method would be a genuinely useful contribution: it is symmetric, positive definite, and simpler to implement than existing WG methods, and the numerical results show optimal convergence rates on nonconvex polytopal meshes, including pressure-robust behavior. The paper also addresses an important gap in the stabilizer-free WG literature, where previous work was limited to convex meshes. However, the key theoretical foundation—the bubble-function-based norm equivalence for nonconvex elements—is not proved in the manuscript and is deferred to the authors' own preprints [36,37]. The main theorems therefore rest on unverified assumptions. The numerical experiments provide supporting evidence but cannot replace a rigorous uniformity argument for the constants in the norm equivalence. The paper is a reasonable candidate for publication if the missing technical lemmas are supplied and the nonconvex case is fully handled.

major comments (2)

[Lemma 4.1, Eq. (4.6); Lemma 4.5, Eq. (4.9)] The proof of the norm equivalence Lemma 4.5, which is the sole coercivity estimate for the stabilizer-free bilinear form, rests on the domain inverse inequality (4.6), asserted in Lemma 4.1 for nonconvex polytopes. The construction of the bubble function Φ_B as a product of squared face linear functions does not guarantee the existence of a subdomain RT with Φ_B ≥ ρ0 > 0 for nonconvex elements: the supporting hyperplane of a face can pass through the interior of T, creating interior zeros of Φ_B. The finite-dimensional norm equivalence would then give a constant depending on the distance from RT to all such zeros, and no uniform (mesh-independent) bound is proved or cited. Since (4.9) is used at (6.8)-(6.9) and in the estimate of J6 in Theorem 7.1, Theorems 6.3 and 7.1 are not established for nonconvex polytopal meshes without additional arguments.
[Lemmas 4.3-4.4; Remark 4.3] Lemma 4.3 and Lemma 4.4, which supply the face-bubble control of the interface jumps used in the lower bound of Lemma 4.5, are not proved in this paper: the proof of Lemma 4.3 states 'For details on these extensions, see [36,37]', and Remark 4.3 concedes that 'additional techniques' are needed for certain nonconvex configurations and again defers to [36,37]. The manuscript is therefore not self-contained at the exact point that distinguishes it from the existing convex-domain theory. The authors should either include complete proofs of Lemmas 4.3-4.5 (including (4.6)) or make the paper explicitly conditional on the preprints [36,37]; in the latter case the main theorems cannot be assessed as standing alone.

minor comments (5)

[Theorem 7.1 proof] In the proof of Theorem 7.1, the text 'Substituting this equation into (8.1)' refers to the wrong equation; it should be (7.3).
[Lemma 4.1 definition] The definition of l_i(x) in Lemma 4.1 is written only for points on the edge/face; it should be defined globally on R^d as the signed distance to the supporting hyperplane, so that the bubble function Φ_B is a polynomial on T.
[References] Reference [37] has an incomplete arXiv identifier ('arXiv:.') and cannot be located; this should be completed or the reference removed.
[Equation (4.10)] Equation (4.10) states the boundary term equals ∫_{e_i} |v_b-v_0|^2 φ_{e_i} ds, but for the matrix-valued test function φ=(v_b-v_0)n^T φ_{e_i}, the boundary term is actually 1/2∫(|v_b-v_0|^2 + ((v_b-v_0)·n)^2) φ_{e_i} ds; the displayed equality is therefore not literally correct, although the subsequent inequality can still be obtained.
[Section 8, general] There are numerous typographical issues, e.g., 'ploytopal' for 'polytopal', 'impressible' for 'incompressible' (in Section 8 before Table 4), and inconsistent use of O(hr) in tables (some rows show '0.0' order on the first grid, which is expected but not explained).

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Stability of the stabilizer-free method rests on bubble-extension lemmas deferred to the authors' own preprints [36,37].

self citation load bearing [Section 4, Lemma 4.3 proof and Lemma 4.5 proof (around Eqs. (4.7)-(4.9)); see also Remark 4.3.]
"We first extend vb, defined on the (d−1)-dimensional edge/face ei, to the entire d-dimensional polytopal element T and claim that vb remains a polynomial vector on T after extension. ... For details on these extensions, see [36, 37]. ... Details of the extensions can be found in Lemma 4.3 and [36, 37]."

The stabilizer-free method's well-posedness and all subsequent error estimates (Theorems 6.3 and 7.1) depend on the norm equivalence (4.9) in Lemma 4.5. The proof of Lemma 4.5 relies on Lemmas 4.3-4.4, whose proofs are not given here; the only justification offered is a pointer to the same first author's preprints [36,37]. The load-bearing coercivity and polynomial-extension facts for nonconvex polytopes are therefore imported from an unverified self-citation rather than derived in the paper. The numerical experiments provide some external evidence, but the formal stability argument reduces to the self-cited preprints.

full rationale

The derivation chain is mostly a standard a priori finite-element analysis: define discrete weak strain and weak divergence, prove a discrete Korn-type norm equivalence, derive an error equation, and bound interpolation and consistency terms. No parameters are fitted to data, and the error bounds in Theorems 6.3 and 7.1 are proven rather than calibrated. However, the paper is not fully self-contained at its central stability step: Lemma 4.5, the norm equivalence that supplies coercivity for the stabilizer-free bilinear form, is proved only by invoking extension and bubble lemmas whose proofs are deferred to the same author's preprints [36,37]. Lemma 4.3 explicitly says 'For details on these extensions, see [36, 37]', and Lemma 4.5 repeats 'Details of the extensions can be found in Lemma 4.3 and [36, 37]'. Because the nonconvex-polytope coercivity is the key premise for existence, uniqueness, and both error estimates, the load-bearing argument is supported by a self-citation chain rather than by an in-paper derivation. The numerical experiments on nonconvex polygonal and polyhedral meshes do provide independent, externally falsifiable evidence that the predicted orders are achieved, and the rest of the analysis (interpolation estimates, error equations, duality argument) is carried out in the paper. Thus the circularity score is moderate: some self-citation is load-bearing, but the central claim still has substantial independent content.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The method introduces no fitted constants; the error estimates are a priori. The main structural assumptions are the domain inverse inequality and the face-extension stability for nonconvex elements, both deferred to self-cited preprints. These are the most fragile premises of the paper.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Shape-regularity of the polytopal partition as defined in [52]
Assumed at the start of Section 3; needed to control the constants in trace and inverse inequalities used throughout the proofs.
ad hoc to paper Existence of a subdomain T_hat with bubble function Phi_B >= rho0 > 0 and comparable measure for nonconvex polytopes
Invoked in Lemma 4.1 to justify the domain inverse inequality (4.6); not proven in this paper and essential for norm equivalence.
ad hoc to paper Polynomial functions on a face can be stably extended to the interior of a nonconvex polytope
Used in Lemmas 4.3-4.5; details are deferred to the author's preprints [36,37], making this an unverified load-bearing premise in the present manuscript.
standard math Second Korn's inequality (4.16) holds on the domain
Cited as Lemma 4.6 and used in the uniqueness proof (Theorem 4.7); this is a classical result for Lipschitz domains.
domain assumption Dual problem regularity (7.2): ||w||_{1+alpha} <= C||zeta0|| with 1/2 < alpha <= 1
Assumed in Theorem 7.1 to derive the L2 error estimate; a standard but nontrivial regularity assumption for the elasticity dual problem.
domain assumption Exact solution smoothness u in [H^{k+1}(Omega)]^d
Standard regularity assumption stated in Theorems 6.3 and 7.1 to obtain optimal-order error estimates.

invented entities (1)

Polynomial bubble function on nonconvex polytopes
purpose: Enforces stability without explicit stabilizers by providing a positive weight in the interior of each element, enabling norm equivalence and error estimates.
Constructed in Section 4; the existence of a positive subdomain with comparable measure is asserted but not fully proven for nonconvex elements, and the extension lemmas rely on self-cited preprints.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Simplified Weak Galerkin Methods for Linear Elasticity on Nonconvex Domains." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VBUAMOS2

@misc{pith2026241117879,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Simplified Weak Galerkin Methods for Linear Elasticity on Nonconvex Domains},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VBUAMOS2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.17879}
}

abstract

This paper presents a weak Galerkin (WG) finite element method for linear elasticity on general polygonal and polyhedral meshes, free from convexity constraints, by leveraging bubble functions as central analytical tools. The proposed method eliminates the need for stabilizers commonly used in traditional WG methods, resulting in a simplified formulation. The method is symmetric, positive definite, and straightforward to implement. Optimal-order error estimates are established for the WG approximations in the discrete $H^1$-norm, assuming sufficient smoothness of the exact solution, and in the standard $L^2$-norm under regularity assumptions for the dual problem. Numerical experiments confirm the efficiency and accuracy of the proposed stabilizer-free WG method.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.17879 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** The first three grids for the computation in Tables 1–2. We compute the finite element solutions for the solution (8.1) on uniform triangular grids shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** The first three non-convex polygonal grids for the computation in Tables 3–4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** The first three grids for the computation in Tables 5-6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The first three grids for the computation in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: The first three grids for the computation in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

An Auto-Stabilized Weak Galerkin Method for Elasticity Interface Problems on Nonconvex Meshes
math.NA 2025-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

An auto-stabilized weak Galerkin method, replacing stabilizers with bubble functions, is analyzed and tested for elasticity interface problems on nonconvex polytopal meshes.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences 24(04 ), 783–796 (2014)

Arnold, D.N.,A w anou, G.,Winther, R, Nonconforming tetrahedral mixed ﬁnite elements for elasticity . Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences 24(04 ), 783–796 (2014)

work page 2014
[2]

SIAM journal on numerical analysis 39(5), 1749–1779 (2002)

Arnold, D.N., Brezzi, F., Cockburn, B., Marini, L.D , Uniﬁed analysis of discontinuous Galerkin methods for elliptic problems . SIAM journal on numerical analysis 39(5), 1749–1779 (2002)

work page 2002
[3]

Mathematica l models and methods in applied sciences , 13(03), 295–307(2003)

Arnold, D.N., Winther, R , Nonconforming mixed elements for elasticity. Mathematica l models and methods in applied sciences , 13(03), 295–307(2003)

work page 2003
[4]

Calcolo 46(1), 49–60 (2009)

A w anou, G, A rotated nonconforming rectangular mixed element for elas ticity. Calcolo 46(1), 49–60 (2009)

work page 2009
[5]

Commu- nications on Pure & Applied Analysis 8(1), 95–121 (2009)

Boffi, D., Brezzi, F., Fortin, M , Reduced symmetry elements in linear elasticity . Commu- nications on Pure & Applied Analysis 8(1), 95–121 (2009)

work page 2009
[6]

GAMM- Mitteilungen 28(2), 124–153 (2005)

Brezzi, F., Marini, L.D , The three-ﬁeld formulation for elasticity problems . GAMM- Mitteilungen 28(2), 124–153 (2005)

work page 2005
[7]

W. Cao, C. W ang and J. W ang , An Lp-Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Method for div-curl Systems, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 42 2, 114881, 2023

2023
[8]

W. Cao, C. W ang and J. W ang, An Lp-Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Method for Convection- Diﬀusion Equations , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 41 9, 114698, 2023

2023

Show all 61 references

[9]

W. Cao, C. W ang and J. W ang , A New Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Method for Elliptic Interface Problems with Low Regularity Assumptions , Journal of Computational Physics, vol. 470, 111538, 2022

2022
[10]

S. Cao, C. W ang and J. W ang , A new numerical method for div-curl Systems with Low Regularity Assumptions, Computers and Mathematics with Applications, vol. 144, pp . 47-59, 2022

2022
[11]

Cao and C

W. Cao and C. W ang , New Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods for Convection-Diﬀusion Problems , Applied Numerical Mathematics, vol. 162, pp. 171-191, 202 1
[12]

Mathematical Problems in Engineering (2010)

Chen, Y., Huang, J., Huang, X., Xu, Y , On the local discontinuous Galerkin method for linear elasticity . Mathematical Problems in Engineering (2010)

2010
[13]

, New hybridized mixed methods for linear elasticity and opti mal multilevel solvers

Gong, S., Wu, S., Xu, J. , New hybridized mixed methods for linear elasticity and opti mal multilevel solvers . Numerische Mathematik 141(2), 569–604 (2019)

2019
[14]

SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 49(4), 1504–1520 (2011 ) 27

Gopalakrishnan, J., Guzman, J , Symmetric nonconforming mixed ﬁnite elements for linear elasticity. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 49(4), 1504–1520 (2011 ) 27

2011
[15]

Journal of Computational Mathematics 30(6), 565–578 (201 2)

Hong, Q., Hu, J., Shu, S., Xu, J , A discontinuous Galerkin method for the fourth-order curl problem . Journal of Computational Mathematics 30(6), 565–578 (201 2)
[16]

Journal of Computational Mathematics 33(3), 283–296 (201 5)

Hu, J , Finite element approximations of symmetric tensors on simp licial grids inRn: The higher order case . Journal of Computational Mathematics 33(3), 283–296 (201 5)
[17]

D. Li, Y. Nie, and C. W ang , Superconvergence of Numerical Gradient for Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods on Nonuniform Cartesian Partitions in Three Dimensions , Com- puters and Mathematics with Applications, vol 78(3), pp. 90 5-928, 2019

2019
[18]

D. Li, C. W ang and J. W ang , An Extension of the Morley Element on General Polytopal Partitions Using Weak Galerkin Methods , Journal of Scientiﬁc Computing, 100, vol 27, 2024

2024
[19]

D. Li, C. W ang and S. Zhang , Weak Galerkin methods for elliptic interface problems on curved polygonal partitions, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, pp. 115 995, 2024

2024
[20]

D. Li, C. W ang, J. W ang and X. Ye , Generalized weak Galerkin ﬁnite element methods for second order elliptic problems , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 445, pp. 115833, 2024

2024
[21]

D. Li, C. W ang, J. W ang and S. Zhang , High Order Morley Elements for Biharmonic Equations on Polytopal Partitions , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 443, pp. 115757, 2024

2024
[22]

D. Li, C. W ang and J. W ang , Curved Elements in Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods , Computers and Mathematics with Applications, Vol. 153, pp. 20-32, 2024

2024
[23]

D. Li, C. W ang and J. W ang , Generalized Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods for Bi- harmonic Equations , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 43 4, 115353, 2023

2023
[24]

D. Li, C. W ang and J. W ang , An Lp-primal-dual ﬁnite element method for ﬁrst-order transport problems, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 43 4, 115345, 2023

2023
[25]

Li and C

D. Li and C. W ang , A simpliﬁed primal-dual weak Galerkin ﬁnite element method for Fokker-Planck type equations , Journal of Numerical Methods for Partial Diﬀerential Equa - tions, vol 39, pp. 3942-3963, 2023

2023
[26]

D. Li, C. W ang and J. W ang , Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods for Transport Equations in Non-Divergence Form , Journal of Computational and Applied Math- ematics, vol. 412, 114313, 2022

2022
[27]

D. Li, C. W ang, and J. W ang , Superconvergence of the Gradient Approximation for Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods on Rectangular Partitions , Applied Numerical Mathemat- ics, vol. 150, pp. 396-417, 2020

2020
[28]

B. Li, X. Xie and S. Zhang , BPS preconditioners for a weak Galerkin ﬁnite element metho d for 2D diﬀusion problems with strongly discontinuous coeﬃc ients, Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 76(4), pp.701-724, 2018

2018
[29]

Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences 21(08), 1761–1782 (2011)

Pechstein, A., Schoberl, J , Tangential-displacement and normal–normalstress contin uous mixed ﬁnite elements for elasticity . Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences 21(08), 1761–1782 (2011)

2011
[30]

Numerische Mathematik 139(1), 93–120 (2018)

Pechstein, A.S., Sch oberl, J , An analysis of the TDNNS method using natural norms . Numerische Mathematik 139(1), 93–120 (2018)

2018
[31]

Fraeijs de Veubeke, B , Stress function approach. Proc. of the World Congress on Fin ite El- ement Methods in Structural Mechanics . Vol. 1, Bournemouth, Dorset, England pp. J.1–J.51 (1975)

1975
[32]

W ang, A Preconditioner for the FETI-DP Method for Mortar-Type Cro uzeix-Raviart Element Discretization , Applications of Mathematics, Vol

C. W ang, A Preconditioner for the FETI-DP Method for Mortar-Type Cro uzeix-Raviart Element Discretization , Applications of Mathematics, Vol. 59, 6, pp. 653-672, 2014

2014
[33]

W ang, New Discretization Schemes for Time-Harmonic Maxwell Equa tions by Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, Vol

C. W ang, New Discretization Schemes for Time-Harmonic Maxwell Equa tions by Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 341, pp. 127-143, 2018

2018
[34]

W ang, Low Regularity Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Me thods for Ill-Posed Elliptic Cauchy Problems , Int

C. W ang, Low Regularity Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Me thods for Ill-Posed Elliptic Cauchy Problems , Int. J. Numer. Anal. Mod., vol. 19(1), pp. 33-51, 2022

2022
[35]

W ang, A Modiﬁed Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Method f or Second Order Elliptic Equations in Non-Divergence Form , Int

C. W ang, A Modiﬁed Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Method f or Second Order Elliptic Equations in Non-Divergence Form , Int. J. Numer. Anal. Mod., vol. 18(4), pp. 500- 523, 2021

2021
[36]

W ang, Auto-Stabilized Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods on Po lytopal Meshes with- out Convexity Constraints , arXiv:2408.11927

C. W ang, Auto-Stabilized Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods on Po lytopal Meshes with- out Convexity Constraints , arXiv:2408.11927. 28 CHUNMEI W ANG AND SHANGYOU ZHANG

arXiv
[37]

W ang, Auto-Stabilized Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods for B iharmonic Equations on Polytopal Meshes without Convexity Assumptions , arXiv:

C. W ang, Auto-Stabilized Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods for B iharmonic Equations on Polytopal Meshes without Convexity Assumptions , arXiv:
[38]

W ang, A New Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Method for Il l-posed Elliptic Cauchy Problems , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol 371 , 112629, 2020

C. W ang, A New Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Method for Il l-posed Elliptic Cauchy Problems , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol 371 , 112629, 2020

2020
[39]

W ang and J

C. W ang and J. W ang, A Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Method for Fokke r- Planck Type Equations , SIAM Numerical Analysis, vol. 58(5), pp. 2632-2661, 2020

2020
[40]

W ang and J

C. W ang and J. W ang , A Primal-Dual Finite Element Method for First-Order Transp ort Problems, Journal of Computational Physics, Vol. 417, 109571, 2020

2020
[41]

W ang and J

C. W ang and J. W ang , Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods for Ellip tic Cauchy Problems , Computers and Mathematics with Applications, vol 79(3), p p. 746-763, 2020

2020
[42]

W ang and J

C. W ang and J. W ang , A Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Method for Secon d Order Elliptic Equations in Non-Divergence form , Mathematics of Computation, Vol. 87, pp. 515-545, 2018

2018
[43]

W ang and J

C. W ang and J. W ang, Discretization of Div-Curl Systems by Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods on Polyhedral Partitions , Journal of Scientiﬁc Computing, Vol. 68, pp. 1144-1171, 2016

2016
[44]

W ang and J

C. W ang and J. W ang, A Hybridized Formulation for Weak Galerkin Finite Element M eth- ods for Biharmonic Equation on Polygonal or Polyhedral Mesh es, International Journal of Numerical Analysis and Modeling, Vol. 12, pp. 302-317, 2015

2015
[45]

W ang and C

J. W ang and C. W ang, Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods for Elliptic PDEs , Science China, Vol. 45, pp. 1061-1092, 2015

2015
[46]

W ang and J

C. W ang and J. W ang , An Eﬃcient Numerical Scheme for the Biharmonic Equation by Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods on Polygonal or Polyhe dral Meshes, Journal of Com- puters and Mathematics with Applications, Vol. 68, 12, pp. 2 314-2330, 2014

2014
[47]

W ang, J

C. W ang, J. W ang, R. W ang and R. Zhang, A Locking-Free Weak Galerkin Finite Element Method for Elasticity Problems in the Primal Formulation , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 307, pp. 346-366, 2016

2016
[48]

W ang, J

C. W ang, J. W ang, X. Ye and S. Zhang , De Rham Complexes for Weak Galerkin Finite Element Spaces, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 39 7, pp. 113645, 2021

2021
[49]

W ang, J

C. W ang, J. W ang and S. Zhang , Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods for Optimal Control Problems Governed by Second Order Elliptic Partial Diﬀerential Equations , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, in press, 2024

2024
[50]

W ang, J

C. W ang, J. W ang and S. Zhang , A parallel iterative procedure for weak Galerkin methods for second order elliptic problems , International Journal of Numerical Analysis and Modeling , vol. 21(1), pp. 1-19, 2023

2023
[51]

W ang, J

C. W ang, J. W ang and S. Zhang , Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods for Quad-Curl Problems, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 42 8, pp. 115186, 2023

2023
[52]

W ang, and X

J. W ang, and X. Ye , A weak Galerkin mixed ﬁnite element method for second-order elliptic problems, Math. Comp., vol. 83, pp. 2101-2126, 2014

2014
[53]

Journal of Scientiﬁc Computing 83(1), 1–17 (2020)

W ang, F., Wu, S., Xu, J , A mixed discontinuous Galerkin method for linear elasticit y with strongly imposed symmetry . Journal of Scientiﬁc Computing 83(1), 1–17 (2020)

2020
[54]

Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences 27(14), 2711–2743 (2017)

Wu, S., Gong, S., Xu, J , Interior penalty mixed ﬁnite element methods of any order in any dimension for linear elasticity with strongly symmetric st ress tensor . Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences 27(14), 2711–2743 (2017)

2017
[55]

W ang, X

C. W ang, X. Ye and S. Zhang , A Modiﬁed weak Galerkin ﬁnite element method for the Maxwell equations on polyhedral meshes , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathemat- ics, vol. 448, pp. 115918, 2024

2024
[56]

W ang and S

C. W ang and S. Zhang , A Weak Galerkin Method for Elasticity Interface Problems , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 419, 114726 , 2023

2023
[57]

W ang and L

C. W ang and L. Zikatanov , Low Regularity Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Finite Element Methods for Convection-Diﬀusion Equations , Journal of Computational and Applied Math- ematics, vol 394, 113543, 2021

2021
[58]

W ang and H

C. W ang and H. Zhou, A Weak Galerkin Finite Element Method for a Type of Fourth Ord er Problem arising from Fluorescence Tomography, Journal of Scientiﬁc Computing, Vol. 71(3), pp. 897-918, 2017. 29

2017
[59]

Xiu and S

Y. Xiu and S. Zhang , A stabilizer-free weak Galerkin ﬁnite element method on pol ytopal meshes, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol 371 , 112699, 2020

2020
[60]

Calcolo 42(2), 115–133 (2005)

Yi, S.Y , Nonconforming mixed ﬁnite element methods for linear elast icity using rectangular elements in two and three dimensions . Calcolo 42(2), 115–133 (2005)

2005
[61]

Mathemat- ical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences 16(07), 979–999 (2006) Department of Mathematics, University of Florida, Gainesvi lle, FL 32611, USA

Yi, S.Y , A new nonconforming mixed ﬁnite element method for linear El asticity. Mathemat- ical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences 16(07), 979–999 (2006) Department of Mathematics, University of Florida, Gainesvi lle, FL 32611, USA. Email address : chunmei.wang@ufl.edu Dep...

2006

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences 24(04 ), 783–796 (2014)

Arnold, D.N.,A w anou, G.,Winther, R, Nonconforming tetrahedral mixed ﬁnite elements for elasticity . Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences 24(04 ), 783–796 (2014)

work page 2014

[2] [2]

SIAM journal on numerical analysis 39(5), 1749–1779 (2002)

Arnold, D.N., Brezzi, F., Cockburn, B., Marini, L.D , Uniﬁed analysis of discontinuous Galerkin methods for elliptic problems . SIAM journal on numerical analysis 39(5), 1749–1779 (2002)

work page 2002

[3] [3]

Mathematica l models and methods in applied sciences , 13(03), 295–307(2003)

Arnold, D.N., Winther, R , Nonconforming mixed elements for elasticity. Mathematica l models and methods in applied sciences , 13(03), 295–307(2003)

work page 2003

[4] [4]

Calcolo 46(1), 49–60 (2009)

A w anou, G, A rotated nonconforming rectangular mixed element for elas ticity. Calcolo 46(1), 49–60 (2009)

work page 2009

[5] [5]

Commu- nications on Pure & Applied Analysis 8(1), 95–121 (2009)

Boffi, D., Brezzi, F., Fortin, M , Reduced symmetry elements in linear elasticity . Commu- nications on Pure & Applied Analysis 8(1), 95–121 (2009)

work page 2009

[6] [6]

GAMM- Mitteilungen 28(2), 124–153 (2005)

Brezzi, F., Marini, L.D , The three-ﬁeld formulation for elasticity problems . GAMM- Mitteilungen 28(2), 124–153 (2005)

work page 2005

[7] [7]

W. Cao, C. W ang and J. W ang , An Lp-Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Method for div-curl Systems, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 42 2, 114881, 2023

2023

[8] [8]

W. Cao, C. W ang and J. W ang, An Lp-Primal-Dual Weak Galerkin Method for Convection- Diﬀusion Equations , Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 41 9, 114698, 2023

2023