Skip to content
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

[WIP] Energy preserving #67

Open
wants to merge 19 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

Sondar74
Copy link

@Sondar74 Sondar74 commented Apr 15, 2024

I have cleaned the previous PR and just kept the nonlinear_constraints file.

RK-coeff-opt/nonlinear_constraints.m Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
RK-coeff-opt/nonlinear_constraints.m Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Hendrik Ranocha <ranocha@users.noreply.github.com>
@ketch
Copy link
Owner

ketch commented Apr 18, 2024

@Sondar74 If the user requests q=8, the current code will ignore that and just give a method with q=7. When the code doesn't do what the user requests, it must inform the user of that. So in this case it should throw an error telling the user that the conditions for q>7 have not been implemented.

Any time a program does something different from what the user requests, it needs to inform the user of that.

@ketch
Copy link
Owner

ketch commented Apr 18, 2024

It's fine. This PR is just a placeholder since this code requires the user to modify the constraint function file directly. If we do merge something into RK-Opt, it will have an interface where the user chooses q through an input parameter.

@ketch ketch changed the title Energy preserving [WIP] Energy preserving Apr 18, 2024
@Sondar74
Copy link
Author

It's fine. This PR is just a placeholder since this code requires the user to modify the constraint function file directly. If we do merge something into RK-Opt, it will have an interface where the user chooses q through an input parameter.

Should I modify the code so that q becomes an optional input parameter for the rk_opt searching function?

@ketch
Copy link
Owner

ketch commented Apr 24, 2024

I think the next critical task is to fully automate the generation of the MATLAB conditions, so we can be confident that they're correct.

@Sondar74
Copy link
Author

I think the next critical task is to fully automate the generation of the MATLAB conditions, so we can be confident that they're correct.

I modified the conditions_generator Notebook so that it returns the Matlab format (in the energy_preserving repository). Please take a look at it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants