Elimination tree — where it appears
Named by 2 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
An ordering that does not wait for the numbers
A sparse factorisation's memory is decided by an ordering computed from the graph, and its stability by pivots computed from the values, and the two decisions fight. On one family of matrices they do not — the ordering can be chosen for fill alone, and the fill the symbolic phase predicts is the fill the factorisation produces — exactly, not as a bound.
An ordering that buys processors, not time
Nested dissection loses to minimum degree on fill and on total work at every grid either measurement could draw. Read along the elimination tree a parallel factorisation works on, it does not win back the time either: its critical path is within 28 per cent of minimum degree's at every size from 8 to 24 points a side, in both directions, and the tree heights and widest columns are nearly the same. What it wins is the ratio. Its total work over its critical path — the most a factorisation on unbounded processors can speed up by — grows from 2.7 to 4.5 while minimum degree's stays between 2.1 and 2.6.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Minimum degreeSymbolic factorisationFill-inFill-reducing orderingFlop countGrowth factorLDLᵀ factorisationNested dissectionQuasi-definite matrixSaddle-point systemsSeparatorSparse pivoting