Updated the nelson ODE function, (made it nicer to look at) and added parameters #1109
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| sol1 = solve(prob, Rodas5P()) | ||
| sol2 = solve(prob, FBDF()) | ||
| sol3 = solve(prob, lsoda()) | ||
| sol4 = solve(prob, lsoda(), saveat = 1e10) |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
saveat does not change the accuracy of the solution. I'm curious, what are you trying to show with this part?
Contributor
Author
|
When I graph lsoda by itself it produces an incorrect graph, but when I
graph it with the saveat parameter it produces a more accurate looking
graph. I know that it shouldn’t change the time step, but do you know why
lsoda produces a more accurate graphed result with saveat?
DESPOTIC, (the python code that I was comparing my results with) uses
scipy.integrate.odeint which uses lsoda from the FORTRAN library odepack.
And I couldn’t figure out how to get Julia lsoda to work until I used
saveat.
…On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 11:17 AM Christopher Rackauckas < ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In benchmarks/AstroChem/nelson.jmd
<#1109 (comment)>
:
> refsol = solve(prob, Vern9(), abstol=1e-14, reltol=1e-14)
+sol1 = solve(prob, Rodas5P())
+sol2 = solve(prob, FBDF())
+sol3 = solve(prob, lsoda())
+sol4 = solve(prob, lsoda(), saveat = 1e10)
saveat does not change the accuracy of the solution. I'm curious, what
are you trying to show with this part?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1109 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BHYFG4PGKOSGMA43DT7VTF3Z5JVINAVCNFSM6AAAAABQTSZCASVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDGOJVG44DGNBYGU>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Member
|
Thanks for the contributions! It needed a little bit more in the bump, which I incorporated into #1110. The built website should have your changes in about 2 days. |
Contributor
Author
|
Awesome! Thank you so much!
…On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 7:54 AM Christopher Rackauckas < ***@***.***> wrote:
Closed #1109 <#1109>.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1109 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BHYFG4M5TULAWJI6UUGHOJ32A5FCBAVCNFSM6AAAAABQTSZCASVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV45UABCJFZXG5LFIV3GK3TUJZXXI2LGNFRWC5DJN5XDWMJVGMZDCNBSGQYTIMY>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Checklist
contributor guidelines, in particular the SciML Style Guide and
COLPRAC.
Additional context
Here are the Nelson ODE updates! Feel free to take or leave any portion of these changes. I didn't find anywhere to add figures, but the plot that this code produces just shows a funky comparison of different algorithms. When I was searching for accurate, quick algorithms to use, I discovered that lsoda produces accurate results using the saveat parameter, but I'm still unsure as to why.
Thanks!