[Commits] [svn:einsteintoolkit] Paper_EinsteinToolkit_2010/ (Rev. 314)
knarf at cct.lsu.edu
knarf at cct.lsu.edu
Tue Mar 13 15:36:04 CDT 2012
User: knarf
Date: 2012/03/13 03:36 PM
Modified:
/
ET.tex, iop_revised.tar.gz
Log:
submitted version
File Changes:
Directory: /
============
File [modified]: ET.tex
Delta lines: +2 -93
===================================================================
--- ET.tex 2012-03-13 20:22:18 UTC (rev 313)
+++ ET.tex 2012-03-13 20:36:03 UTC (rev 314)
@@ -121,19 +121,6 @@
\address{$^{10}$ National Science Foundation, USA}
\ead{knarf at cct.lsu.edu}
-%\thanks{{}$^{(1)}$ Department of Computer Science,
-% Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA}
-%\thanks{{}$^{(2)}$ Department of Physics \& Astronomy,
-% Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA}
-%\thanks{{}$^{(3)}$ Center for Computation \& Technology,
-% Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA}
-%\thanks{{}$^{(4)}$ Center for Computational Relativity \& Gravitation,
-% School of Mathematical Sciences,
-% Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, New York 14623, USA}
-
-% TODO: Already add a few affiliations which we know are going
-% to be used
-
\begin{abstract}
We describe the Einstein Toolkit, a community-driven, freely accessible
computational infrastructure intended for use in numerical relativity,
@@ -156,9 +143,6 @@
\pacs{04.25.D-, 04.30.-w, 04.70.-s, 07.05.Tp, 95.75.Pq}
\maketitle
-% We will remove this at the end, but we leave it in for ourselves now
-%\tableofcontents
-
\section{Introduction}
Scientific progress in the field of numerical relativity has always
@@ -625,8 +609,6 @@
The Simulation Factory supports and simplifies three kinds of
operations:
-%RH: any of the itemize, decription, enumerate environments indents its body
-%by the same amount as \parindent
\begin{description}
\item[1. Remote Access.] The actual access commands and authentication
methods differ between systems, as do the user names that a person
@@ -1562,10 +1544,6 @@
$T^{\mu \nu}$ is the stress-energy tensor, defined in~\eref{eq:Tmunu} as
$T^{\mu \nu} = \rho h u^{\,\mu} u^{\,\nu} + P g^{\,\mu \nu}$,
where $u^{\,\mu}$ is the four-velocity and $\rho$ the rest-mass density.
-%T^{\mu \nu} = \rho h u^{\,\mu} u^{\,\nu} + P g^{\,\mu \nu} $ is the
-%stress-energy tensor. The quantity $ h = 1 + \epsilon + P / \rho $ is
-%the specific enthalpy, $P$ is the fluid pressure and $\epsilon$ is the
-%specific internal energy.
The 3-velocity $v^i$ may be calculated in the form
\begin{equation}
@@ -1793,7 +1771,6 @@
\subsection{Equations of State}
\label{sec:eoss}
-%%% Written by Christian Ott
An equation of state connecting the primitive state variables is
needed to close the system of GR hydrodynamics equations. The module
@@ -1807,8 +1784,6 @@
P = K\rho^\Gamma\,\,,
\end{equation}
where $K$ is the polytropic constant
-% RH: poly.const. is correct term according to arXiv:gr-qc/0211028 below Eq.
-% (9.4)
and $\Gamma$ is the adiabatic
index, is appropriate for adiabatic (= isentropic) evolution without
shocks. When using the polytropic EOS, one does not need to evolve the
@@ -1912,7 +1887,6 @@
hypersurface. The module \codename{EHFinder} is also available to search an
evolved spacetime for the globally defined event horizons.
-% Event horizon
\codename{EHFinder}~\cite{Diener:2003jc}
evolves a null surface backwards in time given an initial guess (e.g.,
the last apparent horizon) which will, in the vicinity of an event
@@ -2339,7 +2313,7 @@
point $x''$ for which there is actual data stored. In this
example, two reflection symmetries along the horizontal and vertical axis
are present. Notice how the vector components change in
- transformations $A$ and $B$.} % Image courtesy of Steve White.}
+ transformations $A$ and $B$.} % Image courtesy of Steve White.
\label{fig:faces}
\end{figure}
@@ -2415,12 +2389,6 @@
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{rot180-grid}
\end{center}
- % ES: This discussion also mentioned buffer points, but was the
- % only place we mention buffer points. Also, the discussion below
- % is quite complex even without buffer points, so I don't mention
- % them any more. (This is technically correct, because the
- % algorithm described below doesn't know about buffer points --
- % these are handled before and afterwards.)
\caption{Example of a grid layout created by
\codename{CarpetRegrid2}. This figure shows two refinement
levels, a coarse (big red circles) and a fine one (small black
@@ -2666,7 +2634,7 @@
\caption{Initial data parameters and initial ADM mass
for a non-spinning equal mass BH binary system. The punctures are located
on the $x$-axis at positions $x_1$ and $x_2$, with puncture bare
-mass parameters $m_1 = m_2 = m$, and momenta %$\pm\vec p$.
+mass parameters $m_1 = m_2 = m$, and momenta
$\vec p_1 = -\vec p_2 = \vec p$.
}
\end{table}
@@ -2718,12 +2686,6 @@
resolution of $2.6 \times 10^{-2}$ radians,
and an error of the same order, since the surface integrals were
calculated by midpoint rule -- a first order accurate method.
-%BCM: This is certainly not correct. Give a better
-% thought later:
-%Note however that this error is still
-%%at least an order of magnitude
-%smaller than, for example, the metric truncation error
-%at this extraction region ($\sim 6.25 \times 10^{-2}$).
In order to evaluate the convergence of the numerical
solution, we ran five simulations with different
@@ -2742,34 +2704,11 @@
potentially introduce, but did not observe any noticeable
difference and we report here on results from the higher-order option.
-%JF: Do we need this at all, if we don't show a traditional convergence plot?
-%\BCM{Move this elsewhere too -- starts here}
-%Since the grid spacings
-%does not follow a $2:1$ ratio, the convergence factor has
-%a different functional form than the usual $2^p$ for a $p$-th accurate
-%finite difference scheme:
-%
-%\begin{equation}
-%Q = \frac{b^p - a^p}{a^p - 1},
-%\end{equation}
-%where $h_{\rm high}=h$, $h_{\rm med}=a\times h$ and
-%$h_{\rm low} = b \times h$. In our case, $a$ and $b$
-%are $1.25$ and $1.5$, respectively. A $4$-th order convergent
-%scheme for our grid spacings would give then a convergence
-%factor of $Q = 1.818$, while a $6$-th and $8$-th order one,
-%$2.691$ and $3.965$, respectively.
-%\BCM{stops here. Remember to amend the text appropriately}
-
In Figure~\ref{fig:amp_phs_convergence}, we show the convergence
of the amplitude and phase of the Weyl scalar by plotting the
logarithm of the absolute value of the differences between two levels
of resolution. The differences clearly converge to zero as the resolution
is increased.
-%BCM: Until we have clearer argument on why we have superconvergence,
-% I am commenting out the following sentence:
-%We also show that the most appropriate convergence factor
-%seems to be the one corresponding to an $8$-th order accurate finite
-%difference approximation.
We also indicate on both plots the time at which the gravitational
wave frequency reaches $\omega=0.2/\mathrm{M}$. This reference time
has been suggested, for example in the NRAR\cite{NRAR:web}
@@ -3012,8 +2951,6 @@
with $\approx$ 60, 80, 120, and 240 grid points. The units of time
on the upper and lower $x$-axes are identical to those of
Figure~\ref{fig:tov_collapse_radii}.
- % initial star radius is: 6M, resolutions are 0.2,0.15,0.1,0.05 on the box
- % (radius 8M) covering the star
}
\end{figure}
In Figure~\ref{fig:tov_collapse_radii}, we plot the approximate
@@ -3138,17 +3075,6 @@
approximate ways (see, e.g.,~\cite{Ott:2006eu,Farris:2008fe,Sekiguchi:2011zd,Sekiguchi:2011mc}).
-%%% One of the desirable additions of physics is a proper treatment of
-%%% radiation, in particular neutrinos. Another desirable addition would be some
-%%% approximation of emission of electro-magnetic waves. Radiation transport is,
-%%% even compared to the full GRMHD problem, computationally very expensive,
-%%% especially in three dimensions.
-
-%%% CDO: It is not appropriate to mention a grant like PetaCactus as an ``NSF Project''.
-%%% Please leave this out.
-%%% Several members of the CIGR team are involved
-%%% in the NSF project PetaCactus, which aims to explore these possibilities.
-
Besides the addition of new physics modules, existing techniques require
improvement. One example is the need for the gauge invariant
extraction of gravitational waves from simulation spacetimes as realized
@@ -3183,19 +3109,6 @@
(e.g.,~\cite{Tchekhovskoy:2007zn}), but still await implementation in
fully dynamical simulations.
-%%% CDO: We have not even talked about the current MHD implementation,
-%%% how can we talk about its improvement?
-%%%
-%%% A second example for an improvement of an existing method is extending the
-%%% current implementation of ideal magnetohydrodynamics to the case of non-zero
-%%% resistivity. Such implementations exist
-%%% and are described in the literature~\cite{???} \todo{cite}, but none have been provided freely
-%%% within the Einstein Toolkit until the recently released ``Maxwell'' version.
-%%% Resistive MHD is important for a number of astrophysical scenarios, one of
-%%% which is the merger of two magnetized NSs, a candidate for short gamma-ray
-%%% bursts.
-%%% \todo{reword - make clear that we describe Curie}
-
Yet another important goal is to increase the scalability of the {\tt
Carpet} AMR infrastructure. As we have shown, good scaling is
limited to only a few thousand processes for some of the most widely used
@@ -3245,11 +3158,7 @@
authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science
Foundation.
-% Take this out when using natbib
-%\section*{References}
-
\bibliographystyle{iopart-num-edit}
-%\bibliographystyle{amsplain-url}
% all references should be in manifest/einsteintoolkit
\bibliography{manifest/einsteintoolkit}
File [modified]: iop_revised.tar.gz
Delta lines: +0 -0
===================================================================
(Binary files differ)
More information about the Commits
mailing list