Fast Matrix-Free Evaluation of Hybridizable Discontinuous Galerkin Operators
Abstract
This paper proposes a new algorithm for fast matrix-free evaluation of linear operators based on hybridizable discontinuous Galerkin discretizations with sum factorization, exemplified for the convection-diffusion equation on quadrilateral and hexahedral elements. The matrix-free scheme is based on a formulation of the method in terms of the primal variable and the trace. The proposed method is shown to be up to an order of magnitude faster than the traditionally considered matrix-based formulation in terms of the trace only, despite using more degrees of freedom. The impact of the choice of basis on the evaluation cost is discussed, showing that Lagrange polynomials with nodes co-located with the quadrature points are particularly efficient.
Notes
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) under the project “High-order discontinuous Galerkin for the exa-scale” (ExaDG) within the priority program “Software for Exascale Computing” (SPPEXA), grant agreement no. KO5206/1-1, KR4661/2-1 and WA1521/18-1.
References
- 1.D. Arndt, W. Bangerth, D. Davydov, T. Heister, L. Heltai, M. Kronbichler, M. Maier, J.-P. Pelteret, B. Turcksin, D. Wells, The deal.II library, version 8.5. J. Numer. Math. 25, 137–145 (2017)Google Scholar
- 2.B. Cockburn, Static condensation, hybridization, and the devising of the HDG methods, in Building Bridges: Connections and Challenges in Modern Approaches to Numerical Partial Differential Equations, ed. by G.R. Barrenechea, F. Brezzi, A. Cangiani, E.H. Georgoulis (Springer, Cham, 2016), pp. 129–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.B. Cockburn, J. Gopalakrishnan, R. Lazarov, Unified hybridization of discontinuous Galerkin, mixed, and continuous Galerkin methods for second order elliptic equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 47, 1139–1365 (2009)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 4.R.M. Kirby, S.J. Sherwin, B. Cockburn, To CG or to HDG: a comparative study. J. Sci. Comput. 51, 183–212 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.M. Kronbichler, K. Kormann, A generic interface for parallel cell-based finite element operator application. Comput. Fluids 63, 135–147 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.M. Kronbichler, K. Kormann, Fast matrix-free evaluation of discontinuous Galerkin finite element operators (2017). arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.03590Google Scholar
- 7.M. Kronbichler, W.A. Wall, A performance comparison of continuous and discontinuous Galerkin methods with fast multigrid solvers (2016). arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.03029Google Scholar
- 8.M. Kronbichler, S. Schoeder, C. Müller, W.A. Wall, Comparison of implicit and explicit hybridizable discontinuous Galerkin methods for the acoustic wave equation. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 106, 712–739 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.R.E. Lynch, J.R. Rice, D.H. Thomas, Direct solution of partial difference equations by tensor product methods. Numer. Math. 6, 185–199 (1964)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.N.C. Nguyen, J. Peraire, B. Cockburn, An implicit high-order hybridizable discontinuous Galerkin method for linear convection–diffusion equations. J. Comput. Phys. 228, 3232–3254 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.S.A. Orszag, Spectral methods for problems in complex geometries. J. Comput. Phys. 37, 70–92 (1980)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.S. Yakovlev, D. Moxey, R.M. Kirby, S.J. Sherwin, To CG or to HDG: a comparative study in 3D. J. Sci. Comput. 67, 192–220 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar