Skip to content

Compute linear residual including Lagrange restrictions#105

Merged
pjaap merged 2 commits intomasterfrom
feature/lagrange-residual
Feb 4, 2026
Merged

Compute linear residual including Lagrange restrictions#105
pjaap merged 2 commits intomasterfrom
feature/lagrange-residual

Conversation

@pjaap
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@pjaap pjaap commented Feb 2, 2026

No description provided.

@pjaap pjaap force-pushed the feature/lagrange-residual branch from d98ad3d to a012f28 Compare February 2, 2026 15:59
@chmerdon
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

chmerdon commented Feb 2, 2026

Besides this really weird error on the macOS test of Example212 I noticed another problem (unrelated to the changes in this PR): when I want to solve a problem with two restrictions with constant_matrix = true for different right-hand sides, the second run crashes, because the QR decomposition is not stored and therefore the right-hand sides of the second run is larger than in the first run, while the matrix stays the same. To fix this, I guess we either need to store the QR decomposition or enforce that constant_matrix cannot be true when compress_restrictions = true. I think I am in favor of the first option. But let's first try to understand/fix the other issue.

@chmerdon
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

chmerdon commented Feb 2, 2026

I am unsure about uniqueness in this example. I think the mean value of the displacement iin the periodic x direction should vanish. We could enforce this by adding another restriction

assign_restriction!(PD, ZeroMeanValueRestriction(u; operator = ExtendableFEMBase.IdentityComponent{1}))

The result looks similar, but the test fails. Maybe we can check if all three architectures agree in this case and redefine the test?

@pjaap
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

pjaap commented Feb 4, 2026

Merging now, since the other problem are unrelated to this PR. The failure for macOS also occurs on master. That and the problem with constant_matrix are attacked separately.

@pjaap pjaap merged commit 57c44e9 into master Feb 4, 2026
8 of 11 checks passed
@pjaap pjaap deleted the feature/lagrange-residual branch February 4, 2026 08:28
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.

2 participants