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

[algorithms.eigs] add implicitly restarted arnoldi method #880

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jun 5, 2020
Merged

[algorithms.eigs] add implicitly restarted arnoldi method #880

merged 6 commits into from
Jun 5, 2020

Conversation

lbalicki
Copy link
Member

I implemented the implicitly restarted arnoldi method for computing a few eigenvalues of a real Operator. This is related to the issues #774 and #772.

@pmli pmli self-requested a review February 28, 2020 16:14
@pmli pmli added algorithms pr:new-feature Introduces a new feature labels Feb 28, 2020
@pmli pmli added this to the 2020.1 milestone Feb 28, 2020
@sdrave
Copy link
Member

sdrave commented Apr 27, 2020

@lbalicki, @pmli, what is the status of this PR? Looks fairly mature. @lbalicki, you should probably rebase on master to get CI running again.

@pmli
Copy link
Member

pmli commented Apr 27, 2020

I still want to try it on some benchmarks.

Copy link
Member

@pmli pmli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've tried eigs on a few SLICOT benchmarks and it works as good as I would have expected, i.e., very good for eigenvalues far from zero and not so good otherwise.

Below are some comments just from looking at the docstring.

Similar to the samdp module, it might be good to add some isinstance assertions in the eigs function and make other functions private (also, it would be good to write QR_iteration in lowercase).

@lbalicki
Copy link
Member Author

lbalicki commented May 8, 2020

I made the changes and also added myself to AUTHORS.md. For eigenvalues that are close to zero I will probably add a shift and invert option sometime in the near future.

@renefritze
Copy link
Member

This'll need another rebase on master after #922 got merged for some CI fixes. Again. Sorry.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 10, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #880 into master will increase coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/pymor/vectorarrays/numpy.py 84.31% <0.00%> (+0.73%) ⬆️

Copy link
Member

@pmli pmli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @lbalicki, here are a few more comments. I would be for merging after resolving these.

@pmli pmli requested a review from sdrave May 27, 2020 16:52
Copy link
Member

@sdrave sdrave left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I did not check the algorithm itself. Apart from a few minor comments, everything looks great!

Copy link
Member

@sdrave sdrave left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we can merge this now ..

@pmli pmli merged commit 66cefab into pymor:master Jun 5, 2020
@pmli
Copy link
Member

pmli commented Jun 5, 2020

Agreed. Thanks @lbalicki.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
pr:new-feature Introduces a new feature
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants