-
I would like to be able to control the finite difference scheme used, i.e. forward, backward or central. Depending upon the PDE, we normally use a custom scheme, e.g. advection --> backwards, diffusio…
-
Hi @bloc97 ,
Thanks for your great work.
Do you know any other papers/implementations using the finite difference gradient descent to do inversion?
I want more references for this solution.
…
-
**Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.**
Finite difference implementation complicates the code. It may cause unexpected side effect since it naturally changes the states of …
-
Second and fourth-order finite-difference approximations of the Jacobian-vector product have been implemented in the dedicated branch. So far, it has been validated for the two-dimensional cylinder fl…
-
We should add some tests checking that gradients computed by our rrules are correct.
For this, we can use [FiniteDifferences.jl](https://github.com/JuliaDiff/FiniteDifferences.jl) or [ChainRulesTestU…
-
The explicit scheme (currently the default) is not accurate for certain combinations of time step and node spacing. Currently VIC gives an error message if the user attempts to run the explicit schem…
tbohn updated
7 years ago
-
Make the code use second-order finite differences for the `v_x` term whenever possible. We can for example follow the approach from the paper below.
http://epubs.siam.org/doi/abs/10.1137/060675186
`…
-
It is very helpful to have a detailed study like yours that addresses a number of critical questions about differential expression for scRNA-Seq experiments.
I am running MAST with RE for a categori…
-
# Add support for derivative checker
The idea is to add and option (`options%check_derivatives = .True.`) that checks for:
1. 1st order derivatives (user Jacobian vs FD approximation)
2. 2nd order …
-
The PDE utilities we have right now are lacking, and something more general is required.
I am currently working on supported GFDM in OTP, which hopefully should be able to support a significantly l…