Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Brainstorming about limiting jumps in TJLF solutions #3

Open
orso82 opened this issue Oct 26, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

Brainstorming about limiting jumps in TJLF solutions #3

orso82 opened this issue Oct 26, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@orso82
Copy link
Member

orso82 commented Oct 26, 2023

image
  1. Hold the widths constant

    • Typically TJLF takes a width guess as input, and then runs the max2 function to find the best width
    • TJLF also has a flag to force use of the width input by the user
    • Can we try to make a input scan, where we let TJLF find the best width once, and then keep the same value for other runs in the scan?
  2. We could try to introduce damping to the eigenvalue solver by adding a constant term that increases the diagonal dominance of the matrix. The values on the diagonal could be a small fraction of the values on the diagonal of the original matrix, ensuring that the damping is proportional to the scale of the system's terms.

@tomneiser
Copy link
Collaborator

The saturation rule and spectral shift are very sensitive to growth rate spectra. Branch jumps are very visible in these spectra, and I also see gaps in the spectra whenever the eigenvalue solver failed to find an actually unstable eigenvalue at a certain ky. So to mitigate the effect of these discontinuities in the spectra, we could make the spectra smooth with interpolation. At first maybe just start with smoothing the output (e.g. electron heat flux spectrum before integration over ky), and then try smoothing the growth rate spectra before calling the spectral shift and saturation rule routines

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants