Paper detail

A comparison between Fast Multipole Algorithm and Tree-Code to evaluate gravitational forces in 3-D

We present tests of comparison between our versions of the Fast Multipole Algorithm (FMA) and ``classic&#39;&#39; tree-code to evaluate gravitational forces in particle systems. We have optimized the Greengard&#39;s original version of FMA allowing for a more efficient criterion of well-separation between boxes, to improve the adaptivity of the method (which is very important in highly inhomogeneous situations) and to permit the smoothing of gravitational interactions. The results of our tests indicate that the tree-code is almost three times faster than FMA for both a homogeneous and a clumped distribution, at least in the interval of N (N< 10^5) here investigated and at the same level of accuracy (error ~ 10^{-3)). This order of accuracy is generally considered as the best compromise between CPU-time consumption and precision for astrophysical simulation. Moreover, the claimed linear dependence on N of the CPU-time of FMA is not confirmed and we give a ``theoretical&#39;&#39; explanation for that.

preprint1997arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.