Active Flux and Polygons: why a stabilisation and how to implement boundary conditions

In a recent paper, the authors developed an Active Flux-type algorithm for polygonal meshes (see \cite{BP_Pampa_VEM}). The main difference between Active Flux methods on polygonal meshes and those on Cartesian or simplex meshes is that the basis functions are not explicitly known. These functions describe the solution using point-value approximations on the polygon boundaries and the average value within the polygons. In \cite{BP_Pampa_VEM}, it was shown that directly transposing the algorithm from simplexes to polygons leads to a mild instability, and a remedy was proposed without a rigorous explanation. In the present paper, we clarify this issue and demonstrate that the solution presented in \cite{BP_Pampa_VEM} is indeed correct. Furthermore, another challenge-the implementation of boundary conditions-was previously solved heuristically. Building on \cite{pampa_dg}, we show how to properly implement these boundary conditions. Finally, the method is illustrated through several examples with hybrid meshes.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
arXiv (Cornell University)
Published
2026-10-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2610.34761
Primary Topic
Advanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Active Flux and Polygons: why a stabilisation and how to implement boundary conditions

Rémi Abgrall, Yongle Liu
arXiv (Cornell University)
Advanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
preprint

Active Flux and Polygons: why a stabilisation and how to implement boundary conditions

Rémi Abgrall, Yongle Liu
preprint en

Abstract

In a recent paper, the authors developed an Active Flux-type algorithm for polygonal meshes (see \cite{BP_Pampa_VEM}). The main difference between Active Flux methods on polygonal meshes and those on Cartesian or simplex meshes is that the basis functions are not explicitly known. These functions describe the solution using point-value approximations on the polygon boundaries and the average value within the polygons. In \cite{BP_Pampa_VEM}, it was shown that directly transposing the algorithm from simplexes to polygons leads to a mild instability, and a remedy was proposed without a rigorous explanation. In the present paper, we clarify this issue and demonstrate that the solution presented in \cite{BP_Pampa_VEM} is indeed correct. Furthermore, another challenge-the implementation of boundary conditions-was previously solved heuristically. Building on \cite{pampa_dg}, we show how to properly implement these boundary conditions. Finally, the method is illustrated through several examples with hybrid meshes.

arXiv (Cornell University)
Advanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon