4.6 Article

A LOW-RANK TENSOR METHOD FOR PDE-CONSTRAINED OPTIMIZATION WITH ISOGEOMETRIC ANALYSIS

期刊

SIAM JOURNAL ON SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING
卷 42, 期 1, 页码 A140-A161

出版社

SIAM PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.1137/18M1227238

关键词

isogeometric analysis; optimal control; low-rank decompositions; tensor train format

资金

  1. German Science Foundation (DFG) [1742243256 - TRR 96]
  2. DAAD-MIUR Joint Mobility Program 2018-2020 [5739665]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Isogeometric analysis (IgA) has become one of the most popular methods for the discretization of PDEs, motivated by the use of nonuniform rational B-splines for geometric representations in industry and science. A crucial challenge lies in the solution of the discretized equations, which we discuss in this paper with a particular focus on PDE-constrained optimization discretized using IgA. The discretization results in a system of large mass and stiffness matrices, which are typically very costly to assemble. To reduce the computation time and storage requirements, low-rank tensor methods as proposed in [A. Mantzaflaris, B. Juttler, B. N. Khoromskij, and U. Langer, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 316 (2017), pp. 1062-1085] have become a promising approach. We present a framework for the assembly of these matrices in low-rank form using tensor train approximations. Furthermore, our framework allows for the exploitation of the resulting low-rank structure of the mass and stiffness matrices, and it can be used to solve a PDE-constrained optimization problem without assembling the actual system matrices and carries the low-rank format over to the solution. We use the block alternating minimal energy method to efficiently solve the corresponding KKT system of the optimization problem. We show several numerical experiments with three-dimensional geometries to demonstrate that the low-rank assembly and solution drastically reduce the memory demands and computing times, depending on the approximation ranks of the domain.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据