-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 126
User defined RHS Splitting for IMEX #2518
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Review checklistThis checklist is meant to assist creators of PRs (to let them know what reviewers will typically look for) and reviewers (to guide them in a structured review process). Items do not need to be checked explicitly for a PR to be eligible for merging. Purpose and scope
Code quality
Documentation
Testing
Performance
Verification
Created with ❤️ by the Trixi.jl community. |
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2518 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage ? 96.27%
=======================================
Files ? 515
Lines ? 42635
Branches ? 0
=======================================
Hits ? 41045
Misses ? 1590
Partials ? 0
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
The following PR implements a way for the user to define a splitting for the RHS by calling
SemidiscretizationHyperbolicSplit
and defining two solver (implicit and explicit). The semidiscretize object returns aSplitODEProblem
, which can be solved via an IMEX method.See: https://docs.sciml.ai/OrdinaryDiffEq/stable/imex/IMEXBDF/, for a list of some semi-implicit solvers.
See: IMEX example for a test case example. (The example is actually not ideal, see the point below)
Features: