Difference between revisions of "$$\eta$$ scaling for dynamical nhyp"
m (Alexan moved page $\eta$ scaling for dynamical nhyp to $$\eta$$ scaling for dynamical nhyp) |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | We performed a scaling test of the $\eta$ parameter on a single $$24^3 \times48$$ nhyp dynamical lattice. We want to determine a regime of $\eta$ values where the $$\eta^2$$ scaling of the mass shift is valid. As we go to smaller values of $\eta$ numerical limitations will begin to arise. We want to find where this break down occurs. We did the analysis for 2 different precisions for the CG inverter: $$10^{-8}$$ and $$10^{-13}$$. | + | We performed a scaling test of the $$\eta$$ parameter on a single $$24^3 \times48$$ nhyp dynamical lattice. We want to determine a regime of $\eta$ values where the $$\eta^2$$ scaling of the mass shift is valid. As we go to smaller values of $\eta$ numerical limitations will begin to arise. We want to find where this break down occurs. We did the analysis for 2 different precisions for the CG inverter: $$10^{-8}$$ and $$10^{-13}$$. |
− | For the $$10^{-8}$$ precision we ran the simulation for 10 values of $\eta$ starting from $\eta_0 = 3.0\times 10^{-5}$. The subsequent values of $\eta$ are in powers of 2, i.e. $\eta_1 = 2^1 \eta_0$, $\eta_2 = 2^2 \eta_0$ etc. For the $10^{-13}$ precision we ran the simulation for 16 values of $\eta$ starting from $\eta_0 = 4.6875\times 10^{-7}$. This value is chosen such that $2^7( 4.6875\times 10^{-7}) = 3.0\times 10^{-5}$. | + | For the $$10^{-8}$$ precision we ran the simulation for 10 values of $$\eta$$ starting from $$\eta_0 = 3.0\times 10^{-5}$$. The subsequent values of $$\eta$$ are in powers of 2, i.e. $$\eta_1 = 2^1 \eta_0$$, $$\eta_2 = 2^2 \eta_0$$ etc. For the $$10^{-13}$$ precision we ran the simulation for 16 values of $$\eta$$ starting from $$\eta_0 = 4.6875\times 10^{-7}$$. This value is chosen such that $$2^7( 4.6875\times 10^{-7}) = 3.0\times 10^{-5}$$. |
− | We plot $(G_E(t) -G_0(t))/\eta^2$ as a function of $\eta$. We expect a constant behavior in the region where the $\eta^2$ scaling is valid. The plots below show our results for the neutron at several different time slices. The parameters used in this analysis are listed in the table below. | + | We plot $$(G_E(t) -G_0(t))/\eta^2$$ as a function of $$\eta$$. We expect a constant behavior in the region where the $$\eta^2$$ scaling is valid. The plots below show our results for the neutron at several different time slices. The parameters used in this analysis are listed in the table below. |
==='''Configuration'''=== | ==='''Configuration'''=== | ||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
! CG precision !! 1e-8 !! 1e-13 | ! CG precision !! 1e-8 !! 1e-13 | ||
|- | |- | ||
− | ! $\kappa$ | + | ! $$\kappa$$ |
| 0.1282 || 0.1282 | | 0.1282 || 0.1282 | ||
|- | |- |
Latest revision as of 22:59, 2 April 2020
We performed a scaling test of the $$\eta$$ parameter on a single $$24^3 \times48$$ nhyp dynamical lattice. We want to determine a regime of $\eta$ values where the $$\eta^2$$ scaling of the mass shift is valid. As we go to smaller values of $\eta$ numerical limitations will begin to arise. We want to find where this break down occurs. We did the analysis for 2 different precisions for the CG inverter: $$10^{-8}$$ and $$10^{-13}$$.
For the $$10^{-8}$$ precision we ran the simulation for 10 values of $$\eta$$ starting from $$\eta_0 = 3.0\times 10^{-5}$$. The subsequent values of $$\eta$$ are in powers of 2, i.e. $$\eta_1 = 2^1 \eta_0$$, $$\eta_2 = 2^2 \eta_0$$ etc. For the $$10^{-13}$$ precision we ran the simulation for 16 values of $$\eta$$ starting from $$\eta_0 = 4.6875\times 10^{-7}$$. This value is chosen such that $$2^7( 4.6875\times 10^{-7}) = 3.0\times 10^{-5}$$.
We plot $$(G_E(t) -G_0(t))/\eta^2$$ as a function of $$\eta$$. We expect a constant behavior in the region where the $$\eta^2$$ scaling is valid. The plots below show our results for the neutron at several different time slices. The parameters used in this analysis are listed in the table below.
Configuration
knhyp242448_beta7.1_kappa0.1282_023
ran on Fermilab.
CG precision | 1e-8 | 1e-13 |
---|---|---|
$$\kappa$$ | 0.1282 | 0.1282 |
n iterations ~ | 700 | 1250 |
timing for 1 inversion ~ | 15 sec | 22 sec |
N GPUs | 2 | 4 |