MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389584775 · doi:10.17118/11143/20867

GPU accelerated Paired Explicit Runge-Kutta methods for high-orderspatial discretizations

2023· article· en· W4389584775 on OpenAlexaff
Brian C. Vermeire

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRunge–Kutta methodsApplied mathematicsComputer scienceOrder (exchange)Computational scienceMathematicsMathematical analysisDifferential equation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to perform unsteady scale-resolving simulations, such as Large Eddy Simulation (LES) and Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS), relies on accurate, efficient, and stable discretizations that are synergistic with modern high-performance computing architectures.In this paper we explore a combination of Graphical Processing Units (GPUs) combined with Paired Explicit Runge-Kutta (P-ERK) temporal discretization for high-order accurate LES/DNS solvers.The P-ERK approach is a fully explicit solver technology that allows different Runge-Kutta schemes with different numbers of active stages to be using in stiff and non-stiff regions of the domain.Results from LES of turbulent flow over an SD7003 airfoil demonstrate that speedup factors of 17.76 and 6.05 can be obtained from GPU acceleration and P-ERK, separately.Combining these yields speedup factors up to 112.This represents a significant two order of magnitude reduction in the computational cost of performing LES/DNS.Final qualitative and quantitative results will be provided for a range of test cases in the final presentation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational MathematicsFrench-language works237,207