2015
DOI: 10.1002/num.22002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Convergence of goal‐oriented adaptive finite element methods for nonsymmetric problems

Abstract: ABSTRACT. In this article we develop convergence theory for a class of goal-oriented adaptive finite element algorithms for second order nonsymmetric linear elliptic equations. In particular, we establish contraction results for a method of this type for Dirichlet problems involving the elliptic operator Lu = ∇·(A∇u)−b·∇u−cu, with A Lipschitz, almost-everywhere symmetric positive definite, with b divergence-free, and with c ≥ 0. We first describe the problem class and review some standard facts concerning conf… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
34
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…and µ E (resp., ζ E ) is the local contribution to µ (resp., ζ) associated with the edge E; (GO-MARK4) this marking strategy is a modification of (GO-MARK2); following [27], we compare the cardinality of M u and that of M z to define Comparing these four strategies, it is proved in [27,Theorem 13] that the GOAFEM algorithm employing marking strategies (GO-MARK2)-(GO-MARK4) generates approximations that converge with optimal algebraic rates, whereas only suboptimal convergence rates have been proved for marking strategy (GO-MARK1); cf. [27,Remark 4] and [34,Section 4]. The numerical results in [27] suggest that (GO-MARK4) is more effective than the original strategy (GO-MARK2) in terms of the overall computational cost.…”
Section: Adaptive Finite Element Methods (Fem)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…and µ E (resp., ζ E ) is the local contribution to µ (resp., ζ) associated with the edge E; (GO-MARK4) this marking strategy is a modification of (GO-MARK2); following [27], we compare the cardinality of M u and that of M z to define Comparing these four strategies, it is proved in [27,Theorem 13] that the GOAFEM algorithm employing marking strategies (GO-MARK2)-(GO-MARK4) generates approximations that converge with optimal algebraic rates, whereas only suboptimal convergence rates have been proved for marking strategy (GO-MARK1); cf. [27,Remark 4] and [34,Section 4]. The numerical results in [27] suggest that (GO-MARK4) is more effective than the original strategy (GO-MARK2) in terms of the overall computational cost.…”
Section: Adaptive Finite Element Methods (Fem)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There exist several strategies of "combining" the two sets M u and M z into a single marking set that is used for refinement in the goal-oriented adaptive algorithm; see [MS09,BET11,HP16,FPZ16]. For goal-oriented adaptivity in the deterministic setting, [FPZ16] proves that the strategies of [MS09, BET11, FPZ16] lead to convergence with optimal algebraic rates, while the strategy from [HP16] might not. The marking strategy proposed in [FPZ16] is a modification of the strategy in [MS09].…”
Section: Marking Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By the standard bound from (5) on the error in the goal-functional in terms of the primal and dual energy-norm errors [19,21,26]…”
Section: Online Basis Functionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, in flow applications, one needs to obtain a good approximation of the pressure in locations where the wells are situated. Goal-oriented adaptivity [1,4,19,21,25,26,28,30,35] (and the references therein) can be used to more efficiently reduce the error in the quantity of interest without necessarily achieving the same rate of error reduction in a global sense. Goal-oriented adaptivity has been introduced within the setting of multiscale methodologies in for instance [2,3,29], where the authors review the framework of approximating a quantity of interest and investigate the use of this framework in a number of multiscale scientific applications (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%