domain decomposition strategies with black box subdomain solvers
DESCRIPTION
Presentation on Domain decomposition strategies with black boxsubdomain solversTRANSCRIPT
Domain decomposition strategies with black boxsubdomain solvers
Silvia Bertoluzza
Istituto di Matematica applicata e Tecnologie Informatiche del CNR, Pavia
Grenoble, May 19th, 2011
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 1 / 18
Motivations
Domain decomposition
Solution of differential problem on Ω = ∪Ωk reduced to solvingproblems in the Ωk ’s + coupling condition
Many advantages:
PreconditioningParallelizationPossibility of treating bigger problem: divide et impera
Two classes
Conforming: continuity is imposed strongly across the subdomain edgesNon conforming: continuity is imposed weakly across the subdomainedges
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 2 / 18
Motivations
Non conforming methods
Allows to couple discretizations of different type:
FE + spectral methodswavelets + FEFE + FE on non matching grids
Flexibility in the choice of meshes / Adaptivity
Possibility of using the “locally best” method
Allows to use different models in different subdomain
Different approaches: Mortar method, 3 Fields formulation, Lagrangemultiplier approach, . . .
Drawback: coupling condition −→ saddle point problem: stabilityproblems and limitations due to inf-sup conditions
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 3 / 18
Motivations
Bulk of the computation: solution of local problems
Great effort spent on optimization of mono-domain codes for solvingPDE’s
Two level of optimization
Algorithm optimization (minimize computational cost)Architecture dependent optimization at compiling time
Goal
Develop domain decomposition methods allowing the use of optimizedcodes as subdomain solvers in a (non conforming) domain decompositionmethod
Important: black-box SD solver
Do not want to touch the SD code in any way
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 4 / 18
Motivations
Use black box SD solvers
Many problems to be faced
Informatics problems: need to be able two make two differentinstances of a code (or two different codes!) talk to each other. Hugeproblem
Mathematical problems
design global solution strategy using standard local solversgive conditions ensuring convergence of the iterative strategydesign suitable preconditionersneed to be able to verify that the SD solvers verify the conditions forconvergence
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 5 / 18
Motivations
To fix the ideas
Model problem−∆u = f in Ω
u = 0 on ∂Ω
Domain decomposition
−∆u = f in Ωk , ∀k[u] = 0 on Σ
[∂νu] = 0 on Σ
+ BC ([·] =jump)
Geometry
Ω = ∪kΩk
Γk = ∂Ωk \ ∂Ωk
Σ = ∪Γk
ΩΩ
Ω
Γ Γ3
Ω
Γ1
1
3
2 2Ω
Ω
Γ Γ3
Σ
Ω
Γ1
1
3
2 2
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 6 / 18
Motivations
The Steklov-Poincare approach
Observation: if we knew u on Σ, Dirichlet problems on thesubdomains would give us u on all the Ωk ’s!
φh: guess for u|Σ → −∆ Solver → uk(φh) (guess for u on Ωk)
Is φh a good guess? Check r = [∂νu(φh)]. If r ∼ 0 then guess isgood!
Steklov-Poincare based methods: find φh “minimizing” |r |
Basis for many DD methods
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 7 / 18
The FETI approach
What can codes do?
Steklov-Poincare operator: “guess” u|Σ −→ “residual”: [∂νu|Σ]
Problem: computation of ∂ν of solution not always available
Input: what are we free to prescribe
differential operatorr.h.s. f(non homogeneous) Dirichlet boundary conditions(non homogeneous) Neumann boundary conditions
Output: what can we expect to retrievevalue of the solution at (boundary) nodesouter normal derivative: more rare!
To be as general as possible design a domain decomposition strategyusing Neumann solvers and imposing continuity of the solution.
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 8 / 18
The FETI approach
Idea: switch the role of trace and normal derivative
“guess” λ = ∂νu|Σsolve Neumann problems on subdomains∫
Ωk
∇u · ∇v =
∫Ωk
f v +
∫Γk
(χkλ)v
(χk = ±1 depends on whether ν is the outer or inner normal w.r. to Ωk)
−→ “residual”: r = [u]|Σ with u solution of Neumann problems
minimize |r | by some iterative technique (Ex: CG method)
floating domains → solution determined modulo a constant
use FETI approach −→ saddle point problem with a scalar multiplier perfloating domain
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 9 / 18
The FETI approach
Discretization
Galerkin discretization with λ ∈ Λh ⊂ L2(Σ) finite dimensional
Discrete problem is well posed provided Λh ⊇ Λ0h
Λ0h = λ ∈ L2(Σ) : ∀`, k λ|Γk∩Γ` = constant
→ use any suitable method
Projected Conjugate Gradient methodConjugate Gradient method on a reduced space
Replace solution of Neumann problem with black box call to a PDEnumerical solver A+
δ
Skip analysis
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 10 / 18
The FETI approach
Assumptions
The discrete solver A+δ satisfy the following estimate:
‖(A+δ − A+)f ‖1,∗ . δs‖f ‖s−1
(weaker assumption) The discrete solver A+h satisfy the following
estimate:‖B(A+
h − A+)f ‖1/2,∗ . δs‖f ‖s−1
The space Λh verify the following inverse inequality
‖λh‖s,Σ . h−s‖λh‖−1/2,Σ
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 11 / 18
The FETI approach
Theorem
Assumptions
The discrete solver A+δ satisfy the following estimate:
‖(A+δ − A+)f ‖1,∗ . δs‖f ‖s−1
The space Λh verify the following inverse inequality
‖λh‖s,Σ . h−s‖λh‖−1/2,Σ
the meshsizes for the subdomain problems are sufficiently finer thanthe meshsize of Λh.
Then the matrix S corresponding to the discrete problem is symmetricpositive definite, provided. Moreover we have that
‖λ− λh‖−1/2,Σ . (hs + δs)‖u‖s+1
S.B. 2011Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 12 / 18
The FETI approach
Numerical experiments: 2D problem
Discretization for Λ: piecewise constants on a uniform mesh
Sobdomain solvers: Matlab PDE toolbox (functions used: meshinit,assempde)
Test: true solution u = (x + 1)2 + y sin(x + 1) on Ω = (−1, 2)× (0, 1)
Boundary conditions: homogeneous Dirichlet on x = −1,non-homogeneous Neuman elsewhere
-1 0 2
1Σ
ν
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 20
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 13 / 18
The FETI approach
h = 1/N meshsize for Λh
δ = 1/M1 meshsize on Ω1
δ = 1/M2 meshsize on Ω2
5 situations
(a) M1 = M2 = N − 1,(b) M1 = M2 = N,(c) M1 = M2 = N + 1,(d) M1 = N + 1, M2 = N − 1(e) M1 = 2N, M2 = [1.5N]
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 14 / 18
The FETI approach
N Case (a) Case (b) Case (c) Case (d) Case (e)
5 - .10093 .08280 .10539 .06271110 - .05002 .050023 .05043 .0288520 - .02416 .02416 .02459 .0143740 - .01201 .01201 .01198 .00718
Table: Errors for u
N Case (a) Case (b) Case (c) Case (d) Case (e)
5 - .04082 .03013 .05866 .0203410 - .01747 .01081 .03873 .0075920 - .01756 .00839 .04806 .0033440 - .00470 .00350 .07849 .00145
Table: Errors for λ
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 15 / 18
The FETI approach
Numerical experiment 3D
Discretization for Λ: cubic splines
Sobdomain solvers: Comsol+Matlab (functions used: )
Right hand side f = x + 3 ∗ y on Ω = (−1, 2)× (0, 1)× (0, 1)
Boundary conditions: homogeneous Dirichlet on x = −1,homogeneous Neumann elsewhere
Comsol: Domain and Grid Comsol: Soluzione
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 16 / 18
The FETI approach
Convergence of the CG algorithm
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 17 / 18
The FETI approach
Conclusions
Different strategies available to use standard solvers in domaindecomposition
Possibility of using Dirichlet or Neumann solver
Inf-sup or inf-sup type conditions need to be satisfied
Stabilization techniques that do not touch the solvers are available
Open issues
Preconditioning (easy)Monitoring the validity of the assumptionsExtending to other class of problems
Thank you!!
Silvia Bertoluzza (IMATI-CNR) DD with Black Box SD solvers Grenoble, May 19th, 2011 18 / 18