2019
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-14244-5_3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Two Stabilized Three-Field Formulations for the Biharmonic Problem

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These share the disadvantages of C0IP methods, while requiring more degrees of freedom than 𝐶 0 approaches. Another attractive option to avoid using 𝐻 2 -conforming methods is mixed finite-element methods, in which the gradient or the Laplacian of the solution are approximated in addition to the solution itself [4,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. A natural classification of such mixed finite-element methods is based on how many functions (fields) are directly approximated.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These share the disadvantages of C0IP methods, while requiring more degrees of freedom than 𝐶 0 approaches. Another attractive option to avoid using 𝐻 2 -conforming methods is mixed finite-element methods, in which the gradient or the Laplacian of the solution are approximated in addition to the solution itself [4,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. A natural classification of such mixed finite-element methods is based on how many functions (fields) are directly approximated.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another attractive option to avoid using H 2 -conforming methods is mixed finiteelement methods, in which the gradient or the Laplacian of the solution are approximated in addition to the solution itself [13][14][15]23,24,40,42]. A natural classification of such mixed finite-element methods is based on how many functions (fields) are directly approximated.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%