I tested further, using Carpet instead of PUGH. I believe that the problem is in the single processor case of PUGHInterp, i.e. that the 2 process results are actually correct. Carpet gives identical answers for 1 and 2 processes.
-erik
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Peter Diener diener@cct.lsu.edu wrote:
Hi,
- Testsuites
A lot has been done over the course of last week, and I would like to thank all involved people. A few issues remain however: 1a) Most AHFinderDirect testsuites fail on 2 processes. This is not new. This has been the same for last release. However, in contrast to some other thorns, AHFinderDirect is used by almost every group, in production simulations. We should really figure out what goes wrong here. Even more severe: preliminary tests suggest that this could be connected to the interpolator, which would make matters only worse if it turns out to be true.
I took a bit closer look at this trying to figure out if the problem is with the interpolator or not. Defining in gr/expansion.cc:
#define GEOMETRY_INTERP_DEBUG2
and changing the output formatting from using %g to %15.11g to get more digits in the debug output it was clear that there was differences in the interpolation results (of the order 1e-5) when running the test parameter file Kerr-definition-expansion.par on 1 or 2 processors, even though the interpolation points were identical.
That parameter file uses the interpolation parameters:
AHFinderDirect::geometry_interpolator_name = "Lagrange polynomial interpolation" AHFinderDirect::geometry_interpolator_pars = "order=4"
I see the same when using:
AHFinderDirect::geometry_interpolator_name = "Lagrange polynomial interpolation" AHFinderDirect::geometry_interpolator_pars = "order=2"
while the following combinations all give identical bh masses on 1 or 2 processors:
AHFinderDirect::geometry_interpolator_name = "Lagrange polynomial interpolation" AHFinderDirect::geometry_interpolator_pars = "order=3"
AHFinderDirect::geometry_interpolator_name = "Hermite polynomial interpolation" AHFinderDirect::geometry_interpolator_pars = "order=2"
AHFinderDirect::geometry_interpolator_name = "Hermite polynomial interpolation" AHFinderDirect::geometry_interpolator_pars = "order=3"
In those cases the largest differences between 1 and 2 processor runs seem to be of order 1e-13.
So it seems there is a bug in AEILocalInterp in the 4th and 2nd order Lagrange interpolation schemes, while the 3rd order Lagrange interpolation and 2nd and 3rd order Hermite interpolation schemes are okay.
Does anybody feel up to looking into this?
Cheers,
Peter
Users mailing list Users@einsteintoolkit.org http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users