New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Discuss the concept of superconvergence better. #10703
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Interesting! I made a few suggestions that made the description flow a bit better. Feel free to pick and choose.
All good points -- thanks, guys! Fixed. |
// at. It turns out that the result we get depends quite sensitively on the | ||
// "quadrature" points being used. There is also the issue of | ||
// superconvergence: Finite element solutions are, on some meshes and for | ||
// polynomial degrees $k\ge 2$, particularly accurate at the node points as |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Its not worth changing, but you still get order 2k convergence for linear elements: its just that k + 1 = 2 * k in that case :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We are technically superconvergent at the Gauss-Lobatto points, not just the Gauss points (i.e., we get order 2*k convergence at mesh nodes too). Otherwise 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry, I meant to mark the other review as 'request changes'.
@bangerth ping |
@drwells comment addressed. |
Following up on a discussion on the mailing list with @cpraveen .