Skip to content
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

use SolvOpt for attenuation coefficients instead of the old way #742

Closed
komatits opened this issue Apr 5, 2016 · 6 comments
Closed

use SolvOpt for attenuation coefficients instead of the old way #742

komatits opened this issue Apr 5, 2016 · 6 comments
Assignees

Comments

@komatits
Copy link
Contributor

komatits commented Apr 5, 2016

The new way to get the relaxation times for attenuation, which is described in http://komatitsch.free.fr/preprints/GJI_Lombard_2016.pdf , is called SolvOpt and used in SPECFEM2D, but not yet cut and pasted in SPECFEM3D and SPECFEM3D_GLOBE.

(cutting and pasting the call to the routine that computes tau_epsilon and tau_sigma).

@komatits
Copy link
Contributor Author

komatits commented Sep 6, 2016

Robin Lee robin DOT lee AT pg DOT canterbury DOT ac DOT nz is working on it and is going to implement it.

@komatits
Copy link
Contributor Author

komatits commented Dec 7, 2017

No easy way to do the full implementation because the code assumes the same tau_sigmas() (equally spaced in log of frequency) for Q_Kappa and Q_mu, while the general SolvOpt() implementation would require different ones.

@komatits komatits closed this as completed Dec 7, 2017
@komatits komatits reopened this Dec 11, 2017
@komatits
Copy link
Contributor Author

However, remark from Alexis Bottero @bottero : calling SolvOpt() is much more expensive because it uses an involved nonlinear optimization process. Thus, if we do it permanently, let us probably turn it OFF by default.
cc Paul @pcristini

@komatits
Copy link
Contributor Author

komatits commented Jan 9, 2018

Not so sure it is a good idea, because very expensive if called by every GLL grid point. If called by a given region of the model only, once for the whole region, then very useful and with negligible cost.

@komatits
Copy link
Contributor Author

Etienne @EtienneBachmann will see if it is worth doing that.

@komatits
Copy link
Contributor Author

Not really needed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants