MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243898055 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2006.4398307

Accelerating Large Cardiac Bidomain Simulations by Arnoldi Preconditioning

2006· article· en· W4243898055 on OpenAlexaff
M. C. Deo, Steffen Bauer, Gernot Plank, Edward J. Vigmond

Bibliographic record

VenueConference proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiation Effects in Electronics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBidomain modelComputer scienceCardiac electrophysiologyNeurosciencePsychologyElectrophysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bidomain simulations of cardiac systems often involve solving large, sparse, linear systems of the form Ax=b. These simulations are computationally very expensive in terms of run time and memory requirements. Therefore, efficient solvers are essential to keep simulations tractable. In this paper, an efficient preconditioner for the conjugate gradient (CG) method based on system order reduction using the Arnoldi method (A-PCG) is explained. Large order systems generated during cardiac bidomain simulations using a finite element method formulation, are solved using the A-PCG method. Its performance is compared with incomplete LU (ILU) preconditioning. Results indicate that the A-PCG estimates an approximate solution considerably faster than the ILU, often within a single iteration. To reduce the computational demands in terms of memory and run time, the use of a cascaded preconditioner is suggested. The A-PCG can be applied to quickly obtain an approximate solution, subsequently a cheap iterative method such as successive overrelaxation (SOR) is applied to further refine the solution to arrive at a desired accuracy. The memory requirements are less than direct LU but more than ILU method. The proposed scheme is shown to yield significant speedups when solving time evolving systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score0.873

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference proceedingsSame topicRadiation Effects in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207