117
Q Zs
(4.20)
Thus the discretized strong-weak system is
∂t
Vw
Cγ∏^s
0
0
N(vs(t),ws(t))
ɪ ∣^B‰(t)
2πα∆τ Is(t)
(4.21)
which is of the same form as (4.14). The notable exception here is that the inputs
are now given according to their local indices.
Model reduction of this system follows in the same manner as that of §4.1.1-4.1.2,
yielding the reduced strong-weak system for arbitrary morphologies:
∂t
. U7’ ((⅛‰,3)C)
U7HsU
CmVs
0
RN(U(:, z)v3, ws)
0
UτΦ
ɪ ∣^B‰(t)^
2πa∆x [uτIs(t) '
(4.22)
One important point should be made concerning the selection of snapshots for
both the POD and DEIM. Although it may seem reasonable to take snapshots of
the strong branches from the simulation of the strong-weak system, this yielded very
poor results for realistic morphologies. However, if the snapshots are taken of these
branches from the full system simulation then the results improve dramatically.
More intriguing information
1. Robust Econometrics2. Spectral density bandwith choice and prewightening in the estimation of heteroskadasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrices in panel data models
3. Developing vocational practice in the jewelry sector through the incubation of a new ‘project-object’
4. Regional differentiation in the Russian federation: A cluster-based typification
5. Who runs the IFIs?
6. Graphical Data Representation in Bankruptcy Analysis
7. 101 Proposals to reform the Stability and Growth Pact. Why so many? A Survey
8. Developmental Robots - A New Paradigm
9. Towards a Strategy for Improving Agricultural Inputs Markets in Africa
10. The name is absent