Clarify finite precision positivity of log density
This commit is contained in:
@@ -17,8 +17,10 @@ eventual EOS to a barotrope. The important choice is what gets exponentiated:
|
|||||||
coordinate change on positive coefficient vectors. The measured negative
|
coordinate change on positive coefficient vectors. The measured negative
|
||||||
density fields already have positive nodal coefficients.
|
density fields already have positive nodal coefficients.
|
||||||
2. Evaluating `rho = rho_scale * exp(u_h(x))` pointwise guarantees strictly
|
2. Evaluating `rho = rho_scale * exp(u_h(x))` pointwise guarantees strictly
|
||||||
positive density wherever `u_h` is finite. This is a different approximation
|
positive density in exact arithmetic wherever `u_h` is finite. Floating-point
|
||||||
family from polynomial density. Every density-dependent operator must use it.
|
evaluation also needs checks for underflow and overflow. This is a different
|
||||||
|
approximation family from polynomial density. Every density-dependent
|
||||||
|
operator must use it.
|
||||||
3. A finite polynomial `u_h` cannot represent an exact zero-density vacuum
|
3. A finite polynomial `u_h` cannot represent an exact zero-density vacuum
|
||||||
surface with that raw exponential. A vanishing reference factor can encode
|
surface with that raw exponential. A vanishing reference factor can encode
|
||||||
the surface, but its asymptotic behavior becomes part of the representation.
|
the surface, but its asymptotic behavior becomes part of the representation.
|
||||||
@@ -256,11 +258,16 @@ corresponding numbers are `6.65377`, `13.7153`, and `74.9786`.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
The first-order identity `delta rho/rho=delta u` makes a log step a relative
|
The first-order identity `delta rho/rho=delta u` makes a log step a relative
|
||||||
density step. That can be useful across large density contrasts, but large log
|
density step. That can be useful across large density contrasts, but large log
|
||||||
steps create exponential changes. Underflow, overflow and weak response near
|
steps create exponential changes. Underflow can produce zero from finite log
|
||||||
vacuum need explicit finite-value checks and meaningful globalization; silently
|
coefficients, so finite-value checks alone do not ensure positivity. A raw
|
||||||
clamping the exponential would change the equations. A vanishing factor removes
|
exponential implementation must also detect or reject underflow and nonpositive
|
||||||
the singular log profile when it matches the asymptotics, but retains the
|
reconstructed density in the material interior, including underflow when
|
||||||
density-weighted sensitivity near vacuum.
|
multiplying by its reference scale or factor. Prescribed zero-density traces
|
||||||
|
from a vanishing reference factor remain intentional. Overflow and weak
|
||||||
|
response near vacuum also need explicit checks and meaningful globalization;
|
||||||
|
silently clamping the exponential would change the equations. A vanishing
|
||||||
|
factor removes the singular log profile when it matches the asymptotics, but
|
||||||
|
retains the density-weighted sensitivity near vacuum.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
With the explicit constant test retained, a converged weak exponential closure
|
With the explicit constant test retained, a converged weak exponential closure
|
||||||
preserves its target cell mass under the closure quadrature. Exponentiation
|
preserves its target cell mass under the closure quadrature. Exponentiation
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user