Subject: RE: FW: C509 ACES Special Issue of Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience From: iizuka Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 18:07:30 +0900 To: "'gcf@indiana.edu'" X-UIDL: b67e712a05340000 X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Received: by mailer.csit.fsu.edu (mbox gcfpc) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Sat Oct 20 10:27:40 2001) X-From_: fox@mailer.csit.fsu.edu Sat Oct 20 08:15:53 2001 Return-Path: Delivered-To: gcfpc@csit.fsu.edu Received: from dirac.csit.fsu.edu (dirac.csit.fsu.edu [144.174.128.44]) by mailer.csit.fsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCDCB23A05 for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 08:15:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost by dirac.csit.fsu.edu (AIX4.2/UCB 8.7) id IAA39680; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 08:15:52 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Message-Id: <200110201215.IAA39680@dirac.csit.fsu.edu> Delivered-To: fox@csit.fsu.edu Received: from fins.uits.indiana.edu (fins.uits.indiana.edu [129.79.6.185]) by mailer.csit.fsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F37B23A05 for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 04:52:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tokyo.rist.or.jp (rist01.tokyo.rist.or.jp [202.241.71.24]) by fins.uits.indiana.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1/IUPO) with ESMTP id f9K8qR222361 for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 03:52:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from iizuka.tokyo.rist.or.jp (rt01.tokyo.rist.or.jp [202.241.71.34]) by tokyo.rist.or.jp (8.9.3/3.7W) with SMTP id RAA15446 for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 17:52:23 +0900 (JST) Received: by iizuka.tokyo.rist.or.jp with Microsoft Mail id <01C15992.1953BCA0@iizuka.tokyo.rist.or.jp>; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 18:07:36 +0900 Message-ID: <01C15992.1953BCA0@iizuka.tokyo.rist.or.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01C15992.195B5DC0" Resent-To: Geoffrey Fox Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 08:15:46 -0400 Resent-From: Geoffrey Fox I send a short memo describing how I addressed referee comments in revision. >Referee 1 ************************************************************* >The presentation is readable but there are many minor misuses of English >in the paper. Two or three times this results in ambiguity or confusion >about the technical content. English in the paper has been revised by native speaker. >The paper addresses three topics: Formulation of the model, Description >of extending the parallel system GeoFEM, and discussion of some >applications. The formulation is fairly brief, just enough for an expert >to understand the mathematical model. There are many ways to obtain a >numerical model and how this is done is not discussed beyond noting that >it is a finite element model. Considerable attention is focused on the >contact of two sliding plates. Several diagrams and some discussion are >provided but one does not learn much about the actual model of this >interaction. I think that it is enough with the formulation of mathematical model to understand important matter for contact analysis using iterative solver because contact analysis FEM modeling in this paper is standard way based on reference [7][8][9] and originality of this paper is combination of Augment Lagrange method, iterative solver and parallel method. I had added performance figure of parallel simulation (figure 9). >An overview is given of GeoFEM and then some discussion is given as how >to extend it to handle moving plates in contact. A mathematical model of >the contact is presented and then reformulated so as to be more suitable >for the parallelization and are within the GeoFEM framework. >This presentation is at an intermediate level, one gets the general idea but >not the actual numerical model. I think that Figure shows some detail of numerical model. >The key idea > is that an agent (called a coupler) is created with the capability of transferring >nformation between two moving meshes. The paper does not use the agent >terminology however. Our system is not agent, includes only well defined interfaces (Figure 14 ) and coupler. >The numerical solvers for the equations are named by method but >no further details are given. Details of solver is written in our group paper ref.[13]. >The examples discussed include (1) A 1.3 million degrees of freedom >simulation using GeoFEM unmodified. A picture and performance data for >one step are given. (2) A 1.2 million degrees of freedom simulation with >moving plates. However, the contact model is simplified so this is not a realistic model. > A picture is given without any performance data. I had added performance figure of parallel simulation (figure 9). >(3) A materials application which is to benchmark the computation against an >independent result. It is not clear to me that the experiment actually >validates the methodology; it is only stated that the results are the >same using one and two processors. I had modified some sentence (page 18, line 11~13). >The paper ends with a high level conceptual design of how to combine >GeoFEM and LSMearth (another modeling code). This is a plausible design; >the issue is how well the implementation works. >In summary, this paper is an overview of a large project in simulation >of the earth. The parallelization issues are just starting to be >addressed, that is, using only a few processors. It is well organized >and, though the English is substandard, the presentation is well done. >Referee 2 ************************************************************* >This is an interesting paper which is rather high level. More details >of the implementation -- especially important would be more discussion of >performance and scaling to larger machines of shared and distributed memory >architecture. I had added performance figure of parallel simulation (figure 9). This paper focused on Analysis System in GeoFEM project. Performance and scaling to larger machines of shared and distributed memory architecture is discussed in our group other papers. Regards Miko Fox wrote: >Thank you very much for your revised paper >I would be very grateful if you could send a short memo describing >how you addressed referee comments in revision >Thank you >iizuka wrote: >> Dear Geoffrey Fox -san, >> >> I am sorry so late for send of revised paper. >> I send you revised my paper. >> >> >> Many thanks, >> >> Regards >> >> Miko