Generator

threshold-switch

One function in the amg library, called 7 times across 7 essays. Below: what it draws at its defaults, what it draws at every value an essay asks for, the 4 claims it put to the test while drawing them, and where it stands against the rule this site is named for.

At its defaults it draws convergence factor against the strength threshold, ε = 0.01. A curve of convergence factor against the strength threshold on a logarithmic axis. It is flat at a high value to the left of a marked position and flat at a low value to the right of it.

threshold-switch is one function in lib/figures/amg.js — algebraic multigrid — a hierarchy with no grid behind it, and what it costs. Everything below came out of it during this build, at arguments taken from the essays rather than invented for this page. A figure here is the figure a reader meets in an essay, and if the generator changes, this page changes with it.

At its defaults

Drawn even though every essay passes arguments — which on this site is every essay, at 100% of placements since the standard pass. A default nothing exercises is a trap for the next essay to call this with none, and this is the page where a default that has drifted from the figures around it becomes visible.

Convergence factor against the strength threshold, ε = 0.01A curve of convergence factor against the strength threshold on a logarithmic axis. It is flat at a high value to the left of a marked position and flat at a low value to the right of it.10⁻³10⁻²10⁻¹00.20.40.60.8strength threshold θresidual reduction per cycleθ = εsemi-coarseningkept whole rowsfull coarseningone parameter, two methodsbest factor above ε0.047best factor below ε0.46the ratio across the switch9.731×31 anisotropic operatora switch, not a dial

A curve of convergence factor against the strength threshold on a logarithmic axis. It is flat at a high value to the left of a marked position and flat at a low value to the right of it.

eps: 0.005

The arguments are the ones A hierarchy with no grid behind it passes. A value drawn at the generator's defaults instead would be a picture no essay asked for and no assertion has been run against.

Convergence factor against the strength threshold, ε = 0.005A curve of convergence factor against the strength threshold on a logarithmic axis. It is flat at a high value to the left of a marked position and flat at a low value to the right of it.10⁻³10⁻²10⁻¹00.20.40.60.8strength threshold θresidual reduction per cycleθ = εsemi-coarseningkept whole rowsfull coarseningone parameter, two methodsbest factor above ε0.048best factor below ε0.47the ratio across the switch9.731×31 anisotropic operatora switch, not a dial

A curve of convergence factor against the strength threshold on a logarithmic axis. It is flat at a high value to the left of a marked position and flat at a low value to the right of it.

eps: 0.002

The arguments are the ones A threshold between fill and growth passes. A value drawn at the generator's defaults instead would be a picture no essay asked for and no assertion has been run against.

Convergence factor against the strength threshold, ε = 0.002A curve of convergence factor against the strength threshold on a logarithmic axis. It is flat at a high value to the left of a marked position and flat at a low value to the right of it.10⁻³10⁻²10⁻¹00.20.40.60.8strength threshold θresidual reduction per cycleθ = εsemi-coarseningkept whole rowsfull coarseningone parameter, two methodsbest factor above ε0.049best factor below ε0.51the ratio across the switch1031×31 anisotropic operatora switch, not a dial

A curve of convergence factor against the strength threshold on a logarithmic axis. It is flat at a high value to the left of a marked position and flat at a low value to the right of it.

eps: 0.01

The arguments are the ones Structure and stability stop being separable passes. A value drawn at the generator's defaults instead would be a picture no essay asked for and no assertion has been run against.

Convergence factor against the strength threshold, ε = 0.01A curve of convergence factor against the strength threshold on a logarithmic axis. It is flat at a high value to the left of a marked position and flat at a low value to the right of it.10⁻³10⁻²10⁻¹00.20.40.60.8strength threshold θresidual reduction per cycleθ = εsemi-coarseningkept whole rowsfull coarseningone parameter, two methodsbest factor above ε0.047best factor below ε0.46the ratio across the switch9.731×31 anisotropic operatora switch, not a dial

A curve of convergence factor against the strength threshold on a logarithmic axis. It is flat at a high value to the left of a marked position and flat at a low value to the right of it.

eps: 0.05

The arguments are the ones The algorithm the libraries actually run passes. A value drawn at the generator's defaults instead would be a picture no essay asked for and no assertion has been run against.

Convergence factor against the strength threshold, ε = 0.05A curve of convergence factor against the strength threshold on a logarithmic axis. It is flat at a high value to the left of a marked position and flat at a low value to the right of it.10⁻²10⁻¹100.20.40.60.8strength threshold θresidual reduction per cycleθ = εsemi-coarseningkept whole rowsfull coarseningone parameter, two methodsbest factor above ε0.052best factor below ε0.41the ratio across the switch7.731×31 anisotropic operatora switch, not a dial

A curve of convergence factor against the strength threshold on a logarithmic axis. It is flat at a high value to the left of a marked position and flat at a low value to the right of it.

What it checked while drawing

Every figure above asserted its own claims on the way to being drawn, and a claim that failed would have failed the build rather than drawn a wrong picture. Those assertions used to leave no trace at all: a passing one returned true and the only evidence the figure had checked anything was that nothing crashed. The list below is what they actually said, collected by running this generator with an observer installed — not a description of what it is believed to check.

4 distinct claims across 5 sets of arguments, grouped below by shape — because most of them are one sentence with a different number in it, and how many separate times that sentence was put to the test is the informative part.

and above it the coarsening is semi-coarsening

at a real anisotropy the semi-coarsened side converges far faster

below ε the coarsening is full

the scan straddles ε

Against the rule

It draws a decomposition and prints its residual. It calls amgSolve, and every figure above carries the badge — which residualcheck verifies by looking for it in the emitted SVG rather than by finding the call that builds one. A badge that is constructed and then left out of the body is the failure that check exists for.

Across the library: the rule bites on 52 of 99 generators — 37 print a residual and 15 are exempt with a published reason; 47 factorise nothing. Read from lib/residual-rule.js, which is the same body the gate enforces from, and the gate's last check fails the build if this page and it disagree about any generator.

Where it is called

Changing this generator changes every figure on this list. That is what makes the list worth publishing rather than keeping in a check script.

Iterating, instead of factorising

A hierarchy with no grid behind it

On a graph Laplacian the algebraic V-cycle converges at 0.199 a cycle, its grid complexity is an unremarkable 3.05, and its operator complexity is 17.7 — one level of forty-one unknowns is entirely dense. The number people quote is the one that does not measure the work.

Sparsity, and what elimination costs

A threshold between fill and growth

One number decides how small a pivot an elimination will accept. At 0.001 the factor holds 172 entries and the matrix grows by 1,330; at 1 it holds 260 and grows by 1.2. The libraries ship 0.1, and the measurement says why.

Sparsity, and what elimination costs

Structure and stability stop being separable

The sparsest variable to eliminate on this matrix has a diagonal entry of 10⁻¹². Eliminating it produces the smaller factor, reproduces the matrix to 3.8·10⁻¹⁷ — better than pivoting does — and returns an answer wrong in the fifth digit.

Eigenvalues, singular values, rank

The algorithm the libraries actually run

Factorise, multiply the factors back in the other order, repeat. That description is complete and correct and produces something nobody would use — on a matrix with eigenvalues +1 and −1 it does not converge at all, and the subdiagonal entry does not move by so much as a rounding error.

Iterating, instead of factorising

The coarse grid the matrix chooses

Given a tridiagonal matrix and no information about a grid, the coarsening keeps every other point and derives the weights ½, 1, ½ — the operators the geometric method was handed. Given the anisotropic operator, it discovers semi-coarsening, in the right direction, without a coordinate.

Iterating, instead of factorising

The spectrum that predicts nothing

For a symmetric matrix the eigenvalues govern how fast an iteration converges. Drop symmetry and they stop governing anything — there is a matrix whose eigenvalues are as evenly spread as eigenvalues can be, on which GMRES makes no progress at all until the last possible step.

Elimination, and the swap

The swap that is not optional

Run elimination without a row interchange on a matrix that needs one and nothing announces a failure. There is no division by zero, no warning, and an answer of the right shape. It is simply wrong, and how wrong depends on a number you did not look at.

The whole library · All essays · What must fail