the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 09 Dec 2025
Automatic tuning of iterative pseudo-transient solvers for modelling the deformation of heterogeneous media
Abstract. Geodynamic modeling has become a crucial tool for investigating the dynamics of Earth deformation across various scales. Such simulations often involve solving mechanical problems with significant material heterogeneities (e.g., strong viscosity contrasts) under nearly incompressible conditions. Recent advancements have enabled the development of iterative solvers based on Dynamic Relaxation or Pseudo-Transient schemes, which require minimal global communication and exhibit quasi-linear scaling on GPU and supercomputing architectures. These solvers incorporate automatic tuning of iterative parameters, including pseudo-time steps and damping coefficients, based on spectral estimates of the discrete operators, ensuring both robust and rapid convergence. We demonstrate the effectiveness of this approach on problems discretized using finite-difference and face-centered finite volume methods, including heterogeneous incompressible Stokes flows. Moreover, the relative algorithmic simplicity of DR-based methods allows for straightforward extensions to compressible flow, multiphase flow, and nonlinear constitutive laws, opening promising avenues for large-scale, high-resolution simulations of geoscientific problems.
Competing interests: one of the authors is also editor
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.- Preprint
(5534 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 03 Feb 2026)
- RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-5641', Alexander Minakov, 27 Dec 2025 reply
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-5641', Anthony Jourdon, 12 Jan 2026
reply
I reviewed the manuscript entitled “Automatic tuning of iterative pseudo-transient solvers for modelling the deformation of heterogeneous media” by Duretz et al. The article presents a dynamic relaxation method to automatically compute the parameters (pseudo-time step and damping term) required by the pseudo-transient solvers. First, they present the principle on a simple 1D Poisson case before applying it to a more complex problem involving saddle-point systems such as the Stokes equation, widely used in computational geodynamics. They show the robustness of their approach with community used benchmarks. The method is showed to be performant and make use of GPU hardware which is very state of the art.
The article is very clear, the methods are well explained and motivated, the reader is guided across the entire procedure and points that could rise questions such as preconditioners are addressed and discussed. In my opinion this article is very relevant for the geodynamic/geoscientific modelling community and should be published by Geoscientific Model Development with very minor corrections that could be handled in a proof correction step.
Minor points:Eq. 7: is sub index “i” next to \hat v supposed to be bold?
What is the sub index “i” representing in this Eq.? In Eqs. 8, 9, 10 it is given as the facet index but not in Eq. 7.
Is n_elem the total number of elements in the domain or the number of elements connected to a face i ?
In Eqs. 8, 9, 10, (and likely 7) is n_fac the total number of facets over the domain \Pi or the number of facets per element?Eq. 10 and Eq. 25: I cannot find a definition of \mathbf b. I think I understand this is the source term, but it was named \mathbf f in the strong form in Eq. 1. If this is it, maybe you should reconsider renaming it consistently across the manuscript, if it is not I think it misses a definition.
l. 95, 99: “hybrid velocity vector”, what is special about this vector to be called hybrid?
Eq. 15: You can consider putting \Delta{\bar t} after the fraction as the bar on the t maybe interpreted as a minus sign in front of \Delta u by a fast reader, but this is very minor.Eq. 25: P is a capital letter in the argument of the functional but small caps in the second integral.
Eq. 26 and Alg. 1 (a): in Eq. 26 \mathbf f is used while in Alg. 1 (a) \mathbf b is used. I think you should consider harmonizing the notation to enhance the readability.
Figure 3: I think that if you add an axis x-y-z it will improve the readability of the figure and make it clearer with respect to the use of x, y and z directions in the text.
l. 345: tau_II is written in letters
l. 367: parenthesis not closed
l. 146, 336, 370: How is the number of 100 iterations chosen? Did you experiment with this number?
l. 388-389: strange citation formatting
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-5641-RC2
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 129 | 72 | 14 | 215 | 13 | 7 |
- HTML: 129
- PDF: 72
- XML: 14
- Total: 215
- BibTeX: 13
- EndNote: 7
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
In their paper, T. Duretz and colleagues suggest improvements to existing strategies of numerical geodynamic modeling through exploring the application of the direct relaxation (DR) method to various geodynamic problems. The key contributions compared to previous works are in the introduction of automated iteration parameter selection in the pseudo-transient method (pseudo-time stepping and damping) and solving incompressible Stokes flow equations using this method combined with Powell-Hestenes iterations. The iteration parameters are determined based on the eigenvalues of the discrete problem. The paper also addresses challenges associated with large viscosity contrasts and the enforcement of incompressibility, showing a systematic analysis. Finite Difference (FD) and Face-Centered Finite Volume (FCFV) discretization methods are employed, with the FCFV approach yielding smooth solutions across viscosity discontinuities. The study is complemented by numerical examples and an accompanying code repository, providing useful resources for further development of practical applications within and beyond the geodynamic community. The paper is well written, but it can still be improved in a few places with more explanation.
Comments: