Solving the Coupled System Improves Computational Efficiency of the Bidomain Equations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The bidomain equations are frequently used to model the propagation of cardiac action potentials across cardiac tissue. At the whole organ level, the size of the computational mesh required makes their solution a significant computational challenge. As the accuracy of the numerical solution cannot be compromised, efficiency of the solution technique is important to ensure that the results of the simulation can be obtained in a reasonable time while still encapsulating the complexities of the system. In an attempt to increase efficiency of the solver, the bidomain equations are often decoupled into one parabolic equation that is computationally very cheap to solve and an elliptic equation that is much more expensive to solve. In this study, the performance of this uncoupled solution method is compared with an alternative strategy in which the bidomain equations are solved as a coupled system. This seems counterintuitive as the alternative method requires the solution of a much larger linear system at each time step. However, in tests on two 3-D rabbit ventricle benchmarks, it is shown that the coupled method is up to 80% faster than the conventional uncoupled method-and that parallel performance is better for the larger coupled problem.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".